User talk:Skylights76

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome!

Hello, Skylights76, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  RJFJR 16:41, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I know this is extremely belated, but thanks! --Skylights76 20:53, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to Amusement Parks Project

Welcome and thank you for joining the Wikipedia:WikiProject Amusement Parks! Please feel free to jump in and help out in any way you can. There is lots of work to do on articles, assessing, putting info boxes on, writing, putting on references, etc., and on the project pages themselves. Thanks again and Welcome. --Tinned Elk 18:08, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Halloween Haunts at Worlds of Fun

Stardust8212 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Nice rewrite of this section. I had tagged it as reading like an advert (and been reverted) but I think your edits handled the issue nicely, hopefully it sticks this time. Stardust8212 12:58, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Actually, I just (heavily) edited a prior rewrite-- done by the same person with whom you argued regarding the Timber Wolf closing rumor. The rewrite had lots of problems but about half of it was salvageable. --Skylights76 19:19, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I didn't want to push too hard on the WoF article after the Timber Wolf incident, that was just...sigh. Anyway, I was very glad to see you'd handled the problem. Stardust8212 19:30, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Attacks

No problem. Hang in there. In the future, if someone is making personal attacks on you, take it to WP:AIV first. Even if it is a sockpuppet, the anti-vandalism admins will see that first. Good luck! Snowfire51 (talk) 08:25, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, I wasn't really attacked until I filed the sockpuppet report. At any rate, now the anti-sockpuppet admins will see the vandalism also, which makes the case even stronger.--Skylights76 (talk) 08:34, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
UPDATE: He's banned [1]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Snowfire51 (talk • contribs) 08:28, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Excellent! :) Another one bites the dust.--Skylights76 (talk) 08:34, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sockpuppets & Trolls

The new sockpuppet is also banned, just letting you know. If I can offer advice, don't let someone who's only here to stir up trouble get to you. Remember WP:TROLL and WP:BEANS, and just ignore them. They won't last long. Take care! Snowfire51 (talk) 10:17, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed. Yeah, I probably fed the troll a little, my bad. But what ideas did I give him? (Edit: I think it occurred to me now.) Anyway, thanks again.--Skylights76 (talk) 10:27, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't think your troll is related to the troll that keeps popping up from the Trenton, Ontario page, as I only ran across the former yesterday, while the other guy has been trying to make the same edit there for a little while. I wouldn't completely rule it out, though, anytime I get an anonymous IP editor stirring up trouble I always run the WHOIS link at the bottom of their talk page and see where their IP is registered. I have run across a few probable sockpuppets that way. Good luck, and thanks for your help! Snowfire51 (talk) 00:07, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I looked at the bottom of a talk page and didn't see the WHOIS link; does this show up only for admins? That would be mighty useful... --Skylights76 (talk) 00:18, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
For example, if you got to the page for Special:Contributions/67.70.40.171, go to the bottom of the page and look in that box. the first link down there should be WHOIS (along with RDNS, RBLs, etc).
If you click on that link, you'll find that IP user is registered to someone in Kingston, Ontario. It's a neat little trick we have with the anon IP users. Snowfire51 (talk) 00:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh, OK, I didn't know it only showed up on the anon IP users' pages. Thanks.--Skylights76 (talk) 00:35, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Oops

Sorry, I thought you bought Dennis Kucinich on the See also section, my bad.

Cheers,

Kevin (talk) 02:01, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

No prob. I'm not the one who added Kucinich, but I did check its legitimacy after someone added it. --Skylights76 (talk) 05:20, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Alex Jones (radio)

Please can you revert Rubin's vandalism on here, he is repeatedly replacing reliably sourced material with his own opinion and is blatantly violating WP:OR, WP:BLP and WP:NPOV. FYI, Rubin was caught attempting to create a sock puppet while being blocked on 13 January 2008. [2] Thanks. --Hereward77 (talk) 19:34, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Request for advice/assistance

Hi there Skylights, I've been pretty busy in real life hence my absence from WP:ROCO for a while. As far as those edits go - it looks to me that the user is trying to state the total height of the ride not the track height. I notice they don't seem to be responding to talkpage messages, but maybe leave a note explaining both the "height" field in the infobox and asking for a source for the information. At least then, in the event they don't reply, you can ask for a temporary block to force them to read their talk page messages. Let me know if you need a hand with anything, Seaserpent85 12:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I think that's right - the height is the difference in elevation from the lowest point of the track to the heighest. Otherwise rides like the now defunct High Roller at the Stratosphere would be the tallest in the world, simply for being up a tower. Then again, despite it being the most reliable, RCDB isn't gospel and there asre errors on there - I always tend to check the individual park's website and compare just to make sure. Seaserpent85 10:46, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thunderhawk

I'm going to Worlds of Fun next week, and I'll try to take better pictures. But It'll be dark so I'll see what shots turn out. That thunderhawk one was all black except for the reflection of the logo. And at the time the Worlds of Fun page was pathetic. So I added the picture and created the thunderhawk page to spice it up a bit. It can be removed, it's not that big a deal, people have called for it's removal. thanks for your help on the page! Moonraker0022 (talk) 14:53, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sources of roller coaster data

I posed a question on several editors' talk pages:

Currently, we use RCDB as a reliable source for roller coaster data. But what if a coaster's data on RCDB doesn't match up with its data on the park's official website? I've seen this happen in several cases. Which should be used as a more reliable source?

Perhaps the park that owns the coaster would know best -- then again, their website might be more concerned with marketing and "round numbers" than accuracy.

I know RCDB is concerned with accuracy, but there are probably still mistakes if they've acquired numbers second-hand: their site says, "The rcdb's data was compiled from a plethora of sources: Usenet, Internet, amusement parks, roller coaster manufacturers and enthusiasts."

Is there a consensus on this?

-- Skylights76 (talk) 00:08, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

For as long as I have been a part of the project (June 2006 - present), RCDB has been used as a reliable source. However, the errors you mentioned and the fact that RCDB uses Usenet for some of its information makes me wonder it would pass the reliable source criteria at WP:VERIFY#Sources. On the other hand, data from park's website would fail the reliable soure criteria as it is not a third party source.
In cases where RCDB and a park's data differs, I would try to find a third party source that would verify which data set is correct.Coaster1983 (talk) 05:11, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I agree with your logic. I've found ThrillNetwork.com to have a good database, and they provide good info about it: "The information on ThrillNetwork.com's database is compiled from a wide variety of sources including books, press releases, online sources, first hand accounts, the parks themselves and various other sources." Coaster Grotto is also good if it's still around (the site is down as I write this). I think both could be used for verification purposes. --Skylights76 (talk) 10:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I recently had an exchange with Duane of RCDB regarding Hades. Since the official site says 70 mph, and Coaster Grotto and ThrillNetwork agree, I emailed RCDB telling them they were missing this data. They replied, telling me that it is mathematically impossible for Hades to go 70 mph and that the fastest it could go is the low 60s. Until Mount Olympus puts a realistic speed on their site, Duane said, they are leaving the speed blank. I was pretty impressed that RCDB would actually verify their data mathematically. It raised my opinion of their accuracy and lowered my opinion of other databases' and official sites' accuracy. Perhaps we should reconsider using a third source to verify, and just use RCDB. --Skylights76 (talk) 07:42, 8 June 2008 (UTC)