User talk:GoneIn60

About me		Talk		Contributions		Wiki Stats

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it. If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, so please add it to your watchlist. Please click here to leave me a new message.

Archives

Oldest – 2014 2015 – 2018 2019 – 2022

Y'all need to create a new article for the new coaster so it doesn't redirect to Montaña Rusa (Parque del Café) anymore... lol - Adolphus79 (talk) 23:30, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adolphus79, would you mind elaborating a bit more? Zambezi Zinger correctly redirects to Montaña Rusa (Parque del Café), since it is the former name of the coaster. Are you suggesting that we need a separate article for Zambezi? If so, that's not what we normally do. The history of a roller coaster is usually very small, especially for lesser known coasters, so we usually combine the complete history into one article. --GoneIn60 (talk) 23:48, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.worldsoffun.com/new-in-2023/zambezi-zinger - Adolphus79 (talk) 02:30, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adolphus79, thanks for the info! I didn't realize there was a new installation opening also called Zambezi Zinger! How cool! I'll work on creating an article soon called Zambezi Zinger (2023) and create a new redirect Zambezi Zinger (1973) that will point to Montaña Rusa. --GoneIn60 (talk) 02:53, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is a disambig really needed? Do you think there will be another instance? Seems like more work and redirects than necessary. If it's the same park, building a new coaster with the same name as one of their old coasters (that name has no relation to Columiba), couldn't we just make Zambezi Zinger about the new coaster (with maybe a short blip about the similarities/connection to the original), keep the content on Montaña Rusa (Parque del Café) as is (slightly expanded after new ZZ opens?), and just add a hatnote to each?

P.S. I did not mean to be short in my original comment, I just saw the wikiproject on your user page and assumed that you and/or the wikiproject already knew.

P.P.S. Go Bucks! - Adolphus79 (talk) 03:10, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Go Bucks!!

Excellent points, Adolphus79. One thing I like to do with redirects is add categories to them, as shown at The Beastie (Kings Island). Some editors find the categories helpful, so that when you look at one like Roller coasters introduced in 1980, you still see previous names listed under the year they opened (appearing in italics), even if they were renamed/moved later on. Yeah, it can turn into lot of extra work, but I don't mind. We also probably need a disambig page unless we feel confident the newer coaster article is the primary topic. If so, then hatnotes would be just fine. --GoneIn60 (talk) 03:31, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also...While much of my time is dedicated to amusement park articles, I don't stay up to speed with the latest news. The WikiProject has also dwindled in participation over the years. If you ever want to chip in, we could use the extra help! Sign up under Participants if you want to receive future newsletters or discussion notifications (they don't occur very often, I promise!). -- GoneIn60 (talk) 03:38, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You called me "ungrammatical" or such, without explaining, and got rid of my additions in this area, roughly, "Rooster dislikes Hangman's cavalier and arrogant attitude, while Hangman criticizes Rooster's cautious flying. Maverick reunites with former girlfriend, and bar owner, Penny Benjamin, to whom he reveals that he promised Rooster's dying mother that Rooster would not become a pilot. Rooster, unaware of the promise since Maverick does not want Rooster's mother blamed, angrily resents Maverick for dropping his Naval Academy application—impeding his military career—and blames him for his father's death. Hangman unexpectedly arrives, coming in time to shoot it down, and the planes return safely."

I didn't see what was wrong with anything I did. Too, if it didn't exceed 700 words, I'm not sure there was a problem there, either. I am being polite by coming to this talk page (at least for now), but I hope you don't mind if I restore all my changes. Too, why did you put the paragraphs back into immense, clunky paragraphs when I separated them into smaller, more readable ones? Finally, what do the 4 tildes for "signature" mean? Thanks, have a nice day. 47.149.210.180 (talk) 19:16, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The exact phrasing I used was, "changes that were a step backward grammatically", and those changes involve more than just the ones you made. The previous version is more succinct in my opinion, using fewer words in an efficient manner to describe the same thing. While there is a 700-word limit, that doesn't mean all plot summaries should be 700 words. Also, this plot summary was the result of multiple editors collaborating, so this isn't my version. It just so happens I didn't see recent changes as an overall improvement. If you'd like to discuss further, please take it to Talk:Top Gun: Maverick where it can be discussed in more detail. Feel free to {{ping}} me to the conversation so I'm aware.

As for the tildes, that is a standard way of signing your posts on Wikipedia. You can read more about that at WP:SIG. Thank you. --GoneIn60 (talk) 19:24, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a de facto "ping": I put something on the TG:Maverick talk page. Have a pleasant day. 47.149.210.180 (talk) 22:40, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Universal Studios Beijing, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Island of Adventure.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Fantastic Four (2015 film) § Summary of reviews in the lead. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 08:15, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Teamwork Barnstar

Iron Gwazi passed its FAC! Although I am a primary contributor to the article, your involvement was just as significant. The road to FA relies on community consensus and voluntary commentary. You dedicated your time and skills to help improve the article to its current condition. Without your input, the article would not have reached its status quo. You are a significant contributor! Whether you are a one-time commenter or contribute to other GA, PR, or FA candidates, I hereby award GoneIn60 with the Teamwork Barnstar! Thank you for your efforts to improve the Iron Gwazi article. Adog (Talk・Cont) 02:31, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, a special thanks from me to you as you actively engaged with the article to edit prose and make on-the-fly suggestions. Your contributions are noted. Hopefully, in the near future, we may add another star to WikiProject Amusement Parks. Adog (Talk・Cont) 02:33, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adog, you are quite welcome! Glad it went through, and I appreciate the barnstar! Looking forward to promoting more FAs down the road. I've got a few articles in mind I've been dragging my feet on! --GoneIn60 (talk) 02:39, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly there probably should be a five paragraph essay of thanks for you and your overall contributions towards the project, plus the article (though in spirit of Wikipedia, I am trying to make these thanks brief). You and Epic were involved in the editing process for grammar and flow (where I lacked at times), reviewed the article without asking, and you even posted to the WikiProject's talk page for feedback (alas, probably no answer, but that is ok)! Your help was especially appreciated for this process, which could have easily failed. Teamwork makes the dreamwork. Adog (Talk・Cont) 03:04, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

APARKS MOS

Hey, long time no talk, haha! I wanted to personally propose to you and some members of WP:APARKS whether we should have a Manuel of style guide for our articles, namely roller coasters, amusement parks, attractions, and manufacturers. Although we do have Wikipedia:WikiProject Amusement Parks/Standards for three of the aforementioned, they do not go explicitly into detail about what content may or may not be important or appropriate for inclusion. It could be beneficial for new members and experienced alike, as I do know we have come to a consensus on points in the past, but we do not have an area where we can point to an explanation outside of digging through the archive bin.

Some issues relevant for roller coaster articles to give you an idea are, for instance: what kinds of reviews or polls should we include in reception, what incidents or accidents are important enough for inclusion, what part of the history should be mentioned, and the short and long-term status of roller coasters? Obviously, we may know most of these answers, but newcomers may not. I know when I started out, I read hundreds of our articles to see how previous editors structured theirs and what content they included that was pertinent or important. Passing idea, I am thinking about typing up at User:Adog/sandbox2 and also wondered if you would like to contribute if it is feasible. We all have a good grip on amusement parks and roller coaster standards. Attractions are kinda in the grey area and most certainly manufacturers. Adog (Talk・Cont) 21:52, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adog: No doubt that the Standards page needs some work. It really hasn't been updated much since its creation in 2010, and of course, it's missing a lot of details. Perhaps we should start with revamping that page first and see if it becomes detailed enough to warrant the creation of a subpage under the MoS, such as MOS:FILM. Although to be honest, I'm not even sure how it would even be promoted to that level. There may have to be wide consensus given at WT:MOS before that could even happen. Someone with a lot of experience in that realm may be able to advise. The problem would be justifying that there are significant differences and clarifications we are bringing to the table that don't already exist in the MoS. I'm not sure we'd have the right argument for that considering there's only a handful of active participants left in this WikiProject. Oh well, start from scratch and see where we end up sounds like a plan! --GoneIn60 (talk) 16:57, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see and agree. Though, I am sure there will be more editors that will join in the future. We did get two in the past week! If we do get an updated style guide up and going it may incentivize more editors to help out if they can learn the ropes. So, start on the existing and then expand outward as needed. MOS does not have much in the way of an "entertainment" style guide outside of media in Category:Wikipedia Manual of Style (arts) and Category:Wikipedia Manual of Style (sports). I could justify a roller coasters guide, amusement parks for sure, attractions could be blended into an encompassing roller coaster guide. Manufacturers I would previously thought it would not, but, Wikipedia:WikiProject Companies/Guidelines and Wikipedia:WikiProject Organizations/Guidelines do not have much to specify.

I would not mind putting my attention into eventually promoting a wider-community agreed MOS guide to help APARKS whether that encompasses one area or all four, however that can come out. Maybe through WP:PROPOSAL once a more detailed guide is implemented? I could argue there is certainly a need for a guide that explains content inclusion at the very least considering how amusements and entertainment easily blends with our policies on WP:TRAVELGUIDE, WP:INDISCRIMINATE, WP:PROMO, or WP:RUMOR, plus non policy on lasting enduring significance. Clarifying content that is and is not one of the aforementioned is important. Amusement parks, attractions, and roller coasters are certainly unique. Adog (Talk・Cont) 18:25, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, sounds good. We can take a deeper dive on the MoS subpage idea at a later time when we're ready to cross that bridge. For now, let's focus on the WikiProject Standards page and getting that up to speed. --GoneIn60 (talk) 19:01, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

your assessment is misleading that Top Thrill 2 is merely a "modification" of Top Thrill Dragster. The only remaining portion of Top Thrill Dragster, is apparently its old highest support tower. You will be creating a nightmare for future editors, by your attempt to merge both of those articles into one. 2607:FB91:174F:9AEB:1544:BB1:BA38:FB0E (talk) 14:52, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There was a discussion with other editors, and there is precedent for the move. See Talk:Top Thrill 2#Requested move 1 August 2023. Also, I was not the editor that ultimately moved the page. --GoneIn60 (talk) 16:19, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to have been minimal "discussion". Not a single one of those editors seems to have comprehended that there is, technically, essentially nothing remaining of Dragster. But your eagerness to edit the prematurely and incorrectly merged articles, is certainly not beneficial, either. 2607:FB91:174F:9AEB:1544:BB1:BA38:FB0E (talk) 17:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have zero interest in debating this with you on my talk page. Take your concerns about article content to the article talk page in question. Also as a warning, do not leave disparaging remarks such as this one on my talk page. Keep it positive and focus on content, not the contributor. --GoneIn60 (talk) 07:37, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly I would like to thank you for correcting my incorrect correction of the dates in the Nemesis article- I was completely unaware that 'th' and the like wasn't used on Wikipedia. However, in reverting the dates, you also removed a new part of the article that I added in the same edit where I 'corrected' the dates. Therefore, I am going to restore my version, and then edit out the dates to be in the correct format, I just wanted to let you know before you thought I was starting an edit war or something. WikiHmmmm... (talk) 11:16, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rougarou (roller coaster) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 03:36, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2024!

Hello GoneIn60, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2024. Happy editing, InfiniteNexus (talk) 07:10, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply] Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

InfiniteNexus (talk) 07:10, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nemesis Reborn, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Airtime.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:47, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OMG, you're from Cincinnati and drive a Jeep? Same. I don't drink beer, but my husband is huge fan of Ohio's craft beers. We could start a fairly well-stocked beer cave from our basement. Valereee (talk) 11:16, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• User:Valereee, I just learned that my colleague, who insists on saying THE Ohio State University, wears clean pajamas every single day. And he and his wife have their own body pillows. I don't trust you Ohioans anymore. Drmies (talk) 02:03, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not from Cincy but close (a little further north), and I've since lost my Jeep to one of the kids. It was a sad day. Hard to keep up with the craft beer scene anymore, but I still enjoy a nice frothy brew from time to time!
  • Drmies, you trusted us before? ;-P --GoneIn60 (talk) 03:28, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hmm yeah, sure, maybe--then again, since my coach retired I don't know what's up or down anymore. Speaking of sad days... Drmies (talk) 03:29, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  THE Ohio State University drives me nuts. I'd revert on site if I didn't hate it so much. Clean pajamas every day sounds exhausting. What must their laundry basket look like at the end of a week? Valereee (talk) 10:13, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GoneIn60, please reconsider your consolidating on the discussion on the Horror film article. I feel like i'm being bullied and attack by the other user who has not been commenting on my suggestions and only bringing up my past edits and character. I struggled to find more information, and as soon as I did, it was just said as "too different", which I think makes sense as I've found new sources on the topic. The current consensus between you two, has errors as pointed out by the Rue Morgue source. As you were the only editor to actually comment on my suggestions per content instead of my editing, I would really hope you could reconsider. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:09, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The only "error" you keep pointing to is the 1972 film, but even if we remove that, that still won't satisfy your concerns. It is just one of many. It appears that you have your mind made up, that material from the THR and NPR sources do not belong on Wikipedia. --GoneIn60 (talk) 02:00, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Horror film, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rue Morgue.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:52, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if you have seen the page move of KD's I-305 to Project 305. I think that was mistake. It looks to me like there is a Project 305 that involves making some changes to I-305 but I don't think that is going to be the new name of the coaster. I asked the person who made the move to provide a source but I'm not sure how often they check the site. Any idea if there is a time limit to undoing a page move? I was going to reach out to some admins, but I'm not sure how to search for admins who have helped us in the past.—JlACEer (talk) 18:48, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. I replied on the article talk page and reverted the move. -- GoneIn60 (talk) 20:58, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Tarzan (1999 film) § Plot rewrite. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 05:50, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw your change to the movie Equilibrium's plot. I know the previous plot section I wrote was pretty long (over 1000 words) but I didn't know there was some sort of plot word count limit. Im pretty bummed that a bunch of time I spent writing a plot summary was just revised, and parts of the plot that showed that Preston was feeling emotions, were just left out. I think it would've been better if you just marked the plot as being too long, and needing to be cut down/ revised to be more concise. Can you give me a link to where the plot word count limit is stated?

Insnesnakos (talk) 01:28, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Insnesnakos: Yes, it can be frustrating sometimes to see something you spent a great deal of time on disappear from an article (in whole or in part), especially as a newer editor learning the ropes. However, rest assured you can always retrieve your previous edit in the page history. For example, you can click this link to see an old revision of the page right after you made your changes. If there are some small incremental changes you'd still like to make, you're welcome to try again, but for a major addition or restructuring, it might be best to discuss at this point on the article talk page.

Before you revisit that film's plot summary, have a look at MOS:FILMPLOT. This is a condensed overview of how to write plot summaries on Wikipedia. For a more detailed overview, see How to write a plot summary. Unfortunately, we cannot recap every event in the storyline that affects character development. In order to stay within 400-700 words, we have to carefully select the most important events, and sometimes that means cutting details that seem important but are ultimately unnecessary. Hope that helps. --GoneIn60 (talk) 10:51, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for giving me the link, I'm planning to retrieve my previous edit and cut it down.

Have a nice day,

Insnesnakos (talk) 15:06, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:The Lion King II: Simba's Pride § Changes to the plot and lead. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:52, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]