User talk:Plighting Engineerd

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 90 days are automatically archived 1 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 4.

A tag has been placed on Category:Roller coasters manufactured by ART Engineering indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:43, 2 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi! I hope this message finds you well. I'm struggling with figuring out what to include in the Six Flags Great America intro paragraphs... I've looked at other articles such as the Kings Island, Canada's Wonderland, and Cedar Point intros but every time I try to do something similar with the Great America intro it's missing something, adding too much, or it just reads the wrong way — and I don't want to destabilize what's on the main page any more.

Do you think you could provide some suggestions or assist with what should and should not be in the intro? It's on my sandbox, and you can feel free to edit — no pressure.

Thank you so much! Feather Better (talk) 13:15, 2 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Feather Better: Hi! Thanks so much for messaging me about this! I'll definitely take a look at that, I appreciate you bringing it up. Thanks again for your continued work on the page. I'll probably get a chance to look at it before the end of the week. Plighting Engineerd (talk) 18:33, 2 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Great, thank you so much again! Feather Better (talk) 21:07, 2 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Feather Better: Alright, I've taken a look at the current lead, the reference articles you mentioned, and the guide page on lead sections.

I think the first paragraph is very strong, as it succinctly identifies the topic of the article and covers its most important aspects: location and the presence of attractions.

The second paragraph is good, starting with the important Marriott ownership aspect. I think the third sentence can be tightened (e.g. "the park has since expanded to feature new attractions and general park expansion" could read better). I feel that the history of the park post-sale to Six Flags is where the intro is most lacking. First, I think that the mention of Hurricane Harbor is suited to the lead, but should probably be clarified that it is not a feature of the park itself, just the wider property (i.e. separate admission). As for other things to mention, I think each subheading under the History section should receive some attention.

However, first, I personally believe the subsection headings should change. Breaking up by decade feels like it leads to some forced titles, especially after the first three. The titles from the 1990s to 2020s all seem to boil down to "major additions", so the differences in wording in some cases don't make much sense to me. I think mentioning the water park and COVID in the titles makes sense, but otherwise, these titles appear to me to be mostly conjecture and not widely defined as major separate eras in the park's history by reliable sources. (Specifically, "record-breaking" likely violates MOS:PEACOCK, and isn't even all that specific - I feel this designation could apply to most, if not all, time periods in the park's history).

If you can find multiple reliable sources that give a general idea as to what the park's major eras have been, I think that would be a good place to start. Once those headings are pinned down, that will give a good indication of the major history points to emphasize in the lead. After all, which topics are included in headings the article as well as what's included in the lead section should both be dictated by reliable sources (what receives the most emphasis in sources should influence its weight in the article and therefore lead - "relative emphasis").

Otherwise, for the lead, I think that it could benefit from listing its most notable attractions (again, based on weight given in reliable sources).

Hopefully that generally makes sense. I'm happy to keep helping with this and discuss things if you'd find it useful! Plighting Engineerd (talk) 22:20, 6 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your recent edits to Drakon (roller coaster) when you modified the page, you introduced conversion errors. The {{convert}} template can be complex and I encourage you to read its documentation but it is also helpful to use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and ensure that the values you have added are displaying correctly. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the page will look like without actually saving it and when conversion errors are present they will show up in red. It is strongly recommended that you always use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 01:42, 8 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

This is the page i'm working for the upcoming Mack Stryker coaster opening at Nigoland

User:CharlieRidesRollerCoasters/sandbox

CharlieRidesRollerCoasters (talk) 02:09, 26 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Great! May I edit it in your sandbox or should I wait until you move it to the mainspace? Plighting Engineerd (talk) 02:14, 26 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

You may edit it! CharlieRidesRollerCoasters (talk) 03:26, 26 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Link: User:CharlieRidesRollerCoasters/sandbox CharlieRidesRollerCoasters (talk) 01:13, 29 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

i started a lil bit of the newsletter, but I will need help completing it. CharlieRidesRollerCoasters (talk) 01:23, 29 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

what should the major news stories be?

- Fun Spot America - Atlanta Closing? CharlieRidesRollerCoasters (talk) 01:24, 29 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi! Thanks so much for starting this! I'll reply to the bit about the stories to include, as well as helping out myself, in a bit. Plighting Engineerd (talk) 01:52, 29 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Newsletter seems good! Any final changes I should make or all we all set? CharlieRidesRollerCoasters (talk) 23:41, 29 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Great! I may make some minor changes before release but overall I think it's good. Plighting Engineerd (talk) 03:08, 30 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

The third round of the 2026 WikiCup ended on 28 June at 23:59 (UTC). As a reminder, good article nomination reviews now receive 10 points, while peer reviews, which continue to be worth 5 points, are now listed in the same section as featured article candidate reviews, rather than with good article reviews. Everyone who competed in round 3 will advance to round 4 unless they have withdrawn or been banned. No other changes to the round-point system have been made for this year.

Round 3 was competitive. Three contestants scored more than 1,000 round points; eight scored over 500; and thirteen scored over 300. The top three contestants had at least one featured article (two of them with two apiece). The following competitors scored more than 800 round points:

• MCE89 (submissions) with 1567 points, mainly from good and featured articles about Australian people and geography, as well as some article reviews
• Bgsu98 (submissions) with 1547 points, mainly from good articles, featured articles, featured lists, and a good topic about figure skating, along with 20 article reviews
• Reconrabbit (submissions) with 1004 points, mainly from a high-multiplier featured article on European rabbit and several good articles, DYKs, and reviews
• A.Cython (submissions) with 1004 points, mainly from good articles about warfare, along with 22 article reviews
• Generalissima (submissions) with 859 points, mainly from good and featured articles about rivers and East Asian topics

The full scores for round 3 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 12 featured articles, 12 featured lists, 7 featured-topic articles, 117 good articles, 74 good-topic articles and more than 30 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 13 In the News articles, and they have conducted nearly 180 reviews. The tournament points table has been updated.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 June but before the start of Round 4 can be claimed in Round 4. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:49, 29 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

In The Loop is published by WikiProject Amusement Parks at the end of each quarter for a total of 4 issues per year. To receive a notice like this one when a new issue is released, add your name to the subscriber list. To unsubscribe, remove your name.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:15, 30 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

For Millennium Force, there is a photo of its sign after its 25th anniversary update. (I added it as a replacement to what was there) However, the 25th anniversary decor is no longer there, Was wondering if I should:

a. Revert to the original photo

b. Keep it as is

c. Replace it with this photo of mine

Personally I lean towards c., but I figured your input could be helpful! Therguy10 (talk) 19:55, 1 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Therguy10: Yep, I support c! Plighting Engineerd (talk) 04:48, 2 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Not sure if you saw this like I did on a forum, but this Werner Stengel book has some great notes. Not sure if we can use it as a source as it is in a Google Drive, but helpful nonetheless! Therguy10 (talk) 18:15, 4 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Wow. I just checked the comments further and there you are. I should’ve known you’d beat me to the punch.

Pretty sure I am 0-2 in finding sources before you right now lol. Touché, Plight, touché… Therguy10 (talk) 18:17, 4 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Heh this made me laugh!

Ans yes, I thought the exact same thing. We are able to use it as a source as long as we source it by title and author (with ISBN) and not linking to the Google Drive translation. Plighting Engineerd (talk) 13:58, 5 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:02, 1 August 2026 (UTC)Reply