Talk:Finding Nemo Submarine Voyage

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Finding Nemo Submarine Voyage article.
Article policies
Finding Nemo Submarine Voyage 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.

Contents

[edit] 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea

I think the 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea section should be moved and expanded into its own article, as the attraction had many differences to Submarine Voyage. I don't know too much about the 20K attraction, so I can't expand it any more than it already is. --Lyght 00:01, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Title Change...

Did we have to change it to the new name of the attraction? We could of just kept it the normal name after all and had the eventual changes be part of it's own section, like in the Journey Into Imagination article... --FigmentJedi 20:36, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

I really don't like the title change, either, and think we should keep them as separate articles. The new ride is likely to be quite different from the old one. Elf | Talk 16:37, 27 September 2005 (UTC)


Yes. Submarine Voyage is quite different then the new attraction. I believe there should be a article for SV, FNSV, 20k Florida, and 20k Tokyo.--Randomgbear 19:27, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

I've split between Finding Nemo Submarine Voyage and Submarine Voyage. I've also removed those pictures which won't apply to the new ride. I've kept the photo of the overview shot of the subs, because the same vehicles are going to be used so the new ride probably won't look much different, though a new photo should eventually be taken. Theshibboleth 03:20, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Thank you! Elf | Talk 05:49, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Now that a year has passed and we know more about the ride, should this be merged with the other Submarine article? SpikeJones 04:26, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sub Names

A few months ago I was able to peek beyond the contruction wall and I noticed there were some subs near the loading area. These were the real subs, but they had what appeared to be cardboard and clingwrap covering them up. There was also a hint of the classic yellow color paint on parts of the subs, and also big numbers painted on the sides of them. One read 304, one was 303, one was 305, etc. This tells me that these numbers correspond to the subs' original names, perhaps they'll be keeping them!

[edit] Recycled Subs?

Where is the source for the information about the old subs being re-used?

Yes, subs are reused with Electric Motors. (Interview with Kathy Mangum, Backstage Pass - Spring 2007) Tiggerjay 18:01, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Adding 2 more seats to an already crowded sub?!?! People are alot bigger now days than when the old submarine first ran!

They gained the space by switching to electric motors. Tiggerjay 18:01, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spoiler Warning?

I placed a spoiler warning above the "Voyage" section, as the section details the attraction's contents. Even though the article subject is non-fiction (the attraction does exist), it does tell a ficticious story (like a book or a movie) whose contents shouldn't be revealed as yet. The attraction hasn't even officially opened, for that matter! I think the warning is justified under the following section of Wikipedia's style guide:

Such reasons should demonstrate that the spoiler tag does not diminish article quality, and that knowledge of the spoiler would substantially diminish many readers' or viewers' enjoyment of the work.

The article is not compromised, and I'm sure many readers are future Disneyland guests who would like to discover what's in the attraction on their own, not by reading someone's take on it. If they don't care, it's here for them to read. If they do, they can skip the section and move on. They should know, at least, that if they read the section they'll know what happens.

McDoobAU93 17:51, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Some people just don't understand that rides can have a fictitious storyline. I think its ok for many Disney rides and park films. There is a storyline there, and obviously its a work of fiction just like movies. I guess fictional story lines in rides just don't count. --blm07 04:50, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

It would appear the WP standard would be to omit the spoiler warning, since it is non-fiction. However, since it is based on fictional work, there is some merrit to your claim. Perhaps this should simply be placed to a 'quick vote' of people actively monitoring this page. That way we avoid an Edit War. Your through? Tiggerjay 05:03, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm all for a vote. My position, in a nutshell, is that certain theme park attractions (obviously not all) tell a story as a movie or novel will, and that the story should not be revealed. As a compromise, let's give it 3 months and then remove the spoiler warning.
McDoobAU93 12:43, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Timeline

Now that the attraction has opened, I suggest removing the timeline as the information carries very little significance for encyclopedia entries. Tiggerjay 20:21, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Subnames

I have removed the subnames because they have been constantly changed over the last several weeks. We should hold back on this list until we can have a confirmed, finalized list of the sub names. Tiggerjay 23:16, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

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

Image:Fnsvposter.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 04:44, 16 September 2007 (UTC)