Talk:Disney's California Adventure Park

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject California This article is part of WikiProject California, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Disney's California Adventure Park is part of WikiProject Disneyland, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the Disneyland Resort on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Assessment Comments
Disney Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disney, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Disney on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
If you have rated this article please consider adding assessment comments.
This article is part of WikiProject Amusement Parks, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Amusement parks. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Phase 2 refurbishment claims

I don't see why anyone added the phase two claims. There is no official confirmation, and half of the ideas aren't even being speculated. I want an opinion on if I should delete it, as it is completely unverified. Thanks. Stitchon (talk) 20:57, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Other previous planned expansions

I remember a long time ago that there were up to four different varieties as a planned expansion/second disneyland park in anaheim.

For instance, one of them was a water based park. Maybe this went on to become the disneysea park in Tokyo.

Do any of you have any information about the other varieties.

I remember that los angeles times had four different pictures/diagrams of all the four parks.

I would like to look at those again and see if it looks like any current disneyland parks. --Sp0 (talk) 16:42, 24 March 2008 (UTC) Sp0 (talk) 16:42, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] wtf ?

Is this an advertisement? Most advertisements are more informative than this appears to be. I haven't interfered here, but I thought the Simpson's quote added a depth here that is currently lacking. But a remark by Lisa Simpson might be out-of-place if this is a Disney advertisement. (What would I know?) Wetman 06:35, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)~

To clarify: this article sucks, and I personally would like it not to suck. It's not even a very good disney ad! There are a lot of very good criticisms that can be levelled at the place -- I'm not sure we need to start with flippant Simpsons quotes. They're taking over enough of the world as it is.
I have no problem with mentioning that in the context of other, deeper criticisms, but in my opinion it added nothing to the article as it stood. --Morven 16:49, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I've largely rewritten the article. Let's work to improve it further. --Morven 22:27, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I have serious PoV problems with this article the way it stands. It seems to be highly critical, while not really providing a lot of information about the park. Additionally, as time has gone on, many of the original criticisms have waned somewhat. I'm going to add some more pertinant information (including notes on the new Twilight Zone attraction). --Feedle 08:10, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

The entire "Lack of Success" heading is highly POV-loaded. I'm thinking it may need to be reworked into the "Criticism" section. Could the eighth most-visited theme park really be deemed "Lack(ing) Success" ? Also, can we get a cite for the "Eighth" claim? --Feedle 17:45, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
Since some of those were mine -- I admit bias. The kind one can only have when one knows just how well Disney could have done it -- and didn't, thanks to the big Scrooge himself, Mr. Eisner. In fairness, many of the criticisms levelled applied to the park as originally opened and are less applicable now. One must say, though, that its 'eighth most-visited' status does have a bit of an 'along for the ride with Disneyland' effect -- whether it would have that success as a stand-alone is questionable. —Morven 19:09, 26 May 2004 (UTC)

[edit] "Initial Lack of Success" Change?

In the DCA article, I think the Initial Lack of Success section should be renamed something like "Attendance Figures" or something of that nature. The park is doing somewhat better than in it's first two years. Most theme parks aren't always totally successful at the start. Disneyland wasn't. Sure, it took a few years for Disney's California Adventure to gain popularity, but now it's the 8th most visited theme park in the US. -Evanwohrman 21:09, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This has been updated Tiggerjay 06:04, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clairifying Golden State area

The existing article states the the Golden State area is divided into 3 sub-lands. I actually believe that per the park brochures and maps from opening till now, Golden State has 5 sub-lands. These include:

1. Condor Flats
2. Golden Vine Winery
3. Grizzly Peak Recreation Area
4. Pacific Wharf
5. The Bay Area


  • I think that the Bay Area gets grouped with the Pacific Wharf as the area is fairly small, and serves as a transition between Grizzly Peak and the Route 66 area of Paradise Pier. Golden Vine Winery is part of Robert Mondavi's Seasons of the Vine --Randomgbear 17:43, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
Lets see... The Golden state area is primarily the corridor that leads between Sunshine Plaza and the rear of the park. It doesn't include the Pacific wharf area, but it does include Condor Flats, Grizzly Peak, and the Winery, which isn't actually a sub-land, but an attraction--Vercalos 06:02, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Rumors Of Expansion And Current Changes" Section

Is it just me, or is the last section a little odd and out of place? It has many misspellings, and seems to have an "insider view" without any real references. It referes to people by their first name and talks about trivila changes that surely haven't been released to the public, if they even exist. --kralahome 03:39, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I tried to clean up that section tonight (it's my first wiki edit, so please excuse me if I did it incorrectly) and completely agree with you. I'm a hardcore Disneyland/DCA insider fan and I've never heard some of that information, while I believe other parts to be falsified. However, I'm not going to remove it until I have further evidence to back it up. I did clean up the spelling/grammar to some sort of readable text though. -Shinku Hisaki 04:39, 5 June 2006 (UTC)


Man.. There is a lot of speculation, without any confirmation, there as well.. And while some of it is believable, I can't really believe that they're going to install a ride specifically to see outside the park, or, moreso, actually charge for said ride, especially considering when it comes to anything to do with entertainment, everything is paid for at admission, so you can watch any of the shows or ride any of the rides without any additional charges.. Also, Disney's policy has often been to make it so you cannot see outside the park from anywhere inside it, though it seems that California Adventure has made exceptions to this rule with California Screamin, Maliboomer, and the Sunwheel, so they might just do it..

I work inside the park and I haven't heard of any of this.. The only remodling I know of is of Pirates of the Carribean in Disneyland.. Of course, this may just be that Disney hasn't informed cast members yet.--Vercalos 07:36, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Honestly, I could do without this section altogether. There are always a million rumors about what Disney might do with the theme parks. And more often than not, they turn out to be completely false or based on early concepts already obsolete/disgarded by the time they're revealed. It seems to me that sticking to including only the expansion plans Disney has officially announced would make this article more "encyclopedia" and less "tabloid"...

I agree. If there is no objection to the deletion of this section by July 6, 2006, then I will delete.--kralahome 01:06, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I went ahead and edited out the incorrect information, and left one paragraph, which I edited with up to date information. -- 18:33, 5 July 2006

The "Placemaking Projects" added on December 8 by 71.193.60.47 seem to be in a similar vein. I personally think it should just be deleted, but I put an "unsourced" tag on it in case anyone can actually confirm any of it. The claim about something happening by 2010 seems particularly questionable, considering Disney often seems to change its plans on much shorter time scales. --70.231.117.195 16:44, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Confusing sentence

What does this sentence mean?

"On the other hand, unoffficial sources has the one day, one park ticket sells for Disneyland at around 15%."

I'm not sure. Maybe that that the Disneyland only passes are 15% of the total sales of single passes? The passage should be removed, or replaced with a cite-able source.--Vercalos 08:27, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Park's Icon's

I think there should be a mention of the parks icons like the Grizzly Peak as well as the Sun located at the back end of the opening land.

[edit] DCA

Maybe there should be some mention that the park is often referred to by it initials as "DCA", for Disney's California Advneture. 67.120.74.232 21:32, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's referred to as DCA several times in the article but there's nothing explicitly stating that DCA=Disney's California Adventure.--Vercalos 03:48, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Toy Story Mania!

In a Disneyland Resort Press Release dated Janaury 26th, 2007 titled "The Year of a Million Dreams Means New Fun & Adventures at Disneyland Resort", says this about the new ride

>>Disney*Pixar characters will also appear in a new Disney's California Adventure attraction, scheduled to open in 2008. Construction has already begun on "Toy Story Mania!" in the Paradise Pier district of the park. It will mark the first time an attraction has been designed and built simultaneously at Disneyland Resort and at Walt Disney World, where "Toy Story Mania!" will open at the Disney-MGM Studios. The attraction will have a 2008 opening at both the California and Florida parks.

"Toy Story Mania!" will set a new standard for the interactive ride/game technology pioneered in the "Buzz Lightyear Astro Blasters" attraction. Guests of all ages will don 3-D glasses and hop into fancifully decorated "Toy Story Mania!" vehicles. While riding along a colorful, midway-themed route, they will shoot at animated targets using their own "toy cannons," scoring points in a series of energetic, fun gaming sequences featuring Woody, Bo Peep and the rest of the gang from Toy Story.<<

It is clear that the exclamation point is part of the official name to the attraction.

[edit] Article is not very encyclopaedic or universally relevant.

I'm sorry, but as with many other Wikipedia pages of topics with large fan bases, this article is a bit masturbative. It disguises itself as encyclopaedic through its relatively formal tone, but underneath that veneer it is little more than a summary of frustrated fan forum posts. Please realise that this article is meant for the real world, not LaughingMicePlanetMedia.com or whatever.

Problems include:

-Peacock words, weasel words and other flowery language

"Paradise Pier is the part of the park that looks most impressive from a distance"

"Disney opened the park with high hopes"

-The criticism section. Who's saying all these things? References please. It may also be far too long for its subject matter (the criticism of a theme park--the article that covers the criticism on the Bush administration is shorter).

-Unverifiable, rant-like speculation: "There is now talk that the new Carsland would be moved to the Timon Parking Lot and the A Bugs Land area would be demolshed to make way for the entrance to Carsland." What is this, Liz Smith's column?

Tomsintown 00:03, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] May 2007 edits to this page

Someone is constantly changing the main page and making incorrect statements.

I don't understand the need for these changes, and looks like the person is trying to just make the park sound better and is removing criticism.

For example, the person adds "It's a popular ride among visitors" to the description of Soarin', but removes the comment about that critics think that Golden Dreams is inaccurate.

Other clearly bias comments included a comment about the fact that the original park had "family-friendly" rides, when a major criticism of the park that it didn't have family-friendly rides, and was one of the reasons that A Bug's Land was added later.

Another change is trying to call Maliboomer a Drop Tower. Maliboomer is a S&S Space Shot that shoots people UP in the air. A drop tower takes persons up slowly, and then drops them. The S&S version is called a Turbo Drop, which is offered at Knott's Berry Farm (Supreme Scream).

Another issue is removing the description of "shopping mall" from the use of the Downtown Disney District. Most general folks have no idea what the Downtown Disney District is, so letting folks know that it is a shopping mall is helpful, but this person feels the need to remove it.


First...Soarin' anyone would agree is arguably the most popular attraction at DCA, as stated in the soarin article here at wikipedia. However, The Golden Dream statement even if true is not verifiable.

As stated in the second paragraph, the line up is different, still most of the park at the beggining had rides for the whole family, there was not even one ride exclusively for the kid, since even the jumpin jellyfish or carousel could be ridden by adults. As stated it featured adult oriented thrill rides and rides for the family.

I think you are confusing a Drop Tower attraction (as a general type of ride) with the specific Turbo Drop ride manufactured by S&S, like the Supreme Scream. The Space shot is a type of Drop Tower attraction. please refer to the manufacturers website and to the article at wiki.

For the Downtown Disney issue, for Disney is not a mall, is an entertainment and shopping districs. However, there is a link for the Downtown Disney article there.

This is not a fanpage, and the intention is to make this more interesting to the general audience as an encyclopedia article, not an anti DCA article. If you please, make an article specifically for the criticism to DCA, but in the article of the park all of this is out of place, since the purpose is to give information about the park, not to show what you think or why do you dislike the park.

[edit] Regarding changes of May 2007

This article really needs improvement and I've tried to do this, however some people simply wont let it. As someone said before, this article is not about criticisms, it's about general information of the park and the article is mainly about why some people think this park is bad, since the criticism section takes more than half the article. It would be great if someone took the time to make an article about criticism. Take the George W. Bush article, for example, just look at the criticism section and it's a lot shorter that DCA, However, there an article about Criticism of George W. Bush (which is still smaller).

I'd like to completely restructure this article based on the Disneyland article, which is way better than this one, and simplify the criticism section into a couple of paragraphs, just the things that the general audience need to know, and not how many times the price has been changed or emphasizing on elements that are disliked by a specific audience. Without a doubt, Disneyland Park has gained way more criticism during it's 52 years than DCA, however there's not even a section for this in the mentioned article, since this is of little or no interest to the general audience that just need information about what the park is, like in a typical encyclopedia article, where only the relevant information must be present.

Enough people have made comments in this discussion page with the intention to improve the article so please let this changes and focus only on relevant and verifiable information about DCA. All together we must have a clear purpose and contribute to make it better.

--189.156.182.112 08:02, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I've already edited the first part of the article...Looking forward to make more of the mentioned changes--189.156.182.112 07:07, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
I´m still working in the layout section, and the criticism...and again, anyone, if you please make an article about criticism....about some changes that are being made...the statement about soarin'...don´t think that´s peacock, since it´s a Fastpass attraction...it´s understood that the popular attractions are the ones that use this service...Also, Downtown Disney (California) here you can see how not even once is refered to as a Mall...that´s too standard...not a mall....as described by they, is a shopping and entertainment district...if anyone doesn't know what Downtown Disney is, there's a link. --189.156.182.112 18:40, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

But we don't say that each FASTPASS attraction is a popular attraction, or that it has FASTPASS (there is a seperate section for it). As for Downtown Disney, it is a "Shoppertainment Mall", a term used for places like Universal CityWalk and Ontario Mills, a place that offers more than just shoping and dining, but the area is a shopping mall, plain and simple, just like any other area designed for folks to walk around and basically shop.

Again, Downtown Disney is not a mall...please, before editing again take the time to read about what a Shopping mall is. [1] here´s one non wiki article that describes Soarin' as one of the most popular attractions of the park, and here Soarin' Over California is described as one of the most visited attractions at the entire resort. Also, the bugs land thing, that's not relevant as information of the park, and even if, just get one way to prove it true, and there stays. For the fouth or fifth time, plase make an article about DCA's critisicsm, since many of your editing is only trully peacock, unverifiable and subjective critisicsm as well as a lot of innacuracies based on what you think/know. Please, let the improvement of this article as it is really needed.--189.156.182.112 17:06, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
It seems that one man's "unverifiable and subjective critisicsm" is another's neutral point-of-view.➪HiDrNick! 10:04, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
That´s obvious, but due to the nature of the information about this theme park and the different opinions about it would end in an edit war...what we have to do here is to rely only in trully verifiable information. This would never end.--189.156.182.112 00:47, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dedication section

Yesterday I removed the "dedication" section from the article. I was reverted upon and admonished to take this to the talk page, so here I am. It seems like an obvious improvement. The article already reads like a fan site, so why not clean it up a bit? Perhaps we can find a better spot for it, if people fell that strongly about keeping it, but it reads like a Disney brochure, not an encyclopedia article. ➪HiDrNick! 06:18, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

If it resembles a fansite is an Antifan site...every article of each Disney theme park shows the dedication, it´s not fan stuff, is part of the information of the park, and I don´t see why it shouldn't be there.--189.156.182.112 21:59, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Recent Changes

Wow, I took a look at this article a few days ago and it was horrible! I was too lazy to sign in but I did edit a lot of the descriptions of the lands and improved things a bit. Thanks to who ever added those images :-) More images could improve the article in some sections, keep the dedication, and please replace that badly put together picture of Paradise Pier. I would do it myself but I dont edit much and dont know how.

[edit] Move Lands to main DCA page

Wouldnt it be better to move all the separate DCA land articles (Paradise Pier, Golden State, ect) to the main DCA article? Just a suggestion.

[edit] Condor Flats

While most of California's aircraft industry is based in the Mojave, the actual theme for Condor Flats is farther north.--Vercalos 05:30, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

This articles sources a very weak. The second source is that of a blog and according to Wikipedia's standards blogs are not allowed as sources. This article needs more verifiable sources. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Richandler86 (talk • contribs).

Yes, you are correct, would you mind marking the areas which you believe a source/reference would be helpful or needed. See WP:FACT. Thanks. Tiggerjay 06:49, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Eletrical Light Parade - Hiatus

To the editor who is continuing to post that the ELP is on Hiatus, please see the DCA Entertainment Listing. If the attraction was on hiatus, it would not be listed. It is, however not being run nightly due to seasonal closures - which is very different then a hiatus. :) Also, since I've got your attention (editor), please note that your other edits were reverted because they were commentary/discussion within an article and partially contained Original Research. I hope you understand, and can make appropriate corrections. Thanks. Tiggerjay 08:01, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:33293852.jpg

Image:33293852.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 02:01, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PR Copy?

The new information about changes planned for 2007-08 is being presented in a promotional fashion. The language is not neutral, so I'm letting folks know that it could use some attention. I'll try to improve it myself when I have a chance. This section could be supplemented with information about when certain rides or attractions will be closed to visitors. Pschelden 09:56, 8 November 2007 (UTC)