Wikipedia

Talk:List of incidents at Walt Disney World/Archive 1

< Talk:List of incidents at Walt Disney World
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Funnyfarmofdoom in topic Employee gets crushed and two boys drown
Archive 1

And the point is...?

Latest comment: 13 years ago5 comments4 people in discussion

I honestly cannot see the point of this list/article. As far as I can tell, all but one or two of them were minor incidents or visitors falling ill and of absolutely no encyclopedic relevance whatsoever.

One can find dozen of incidents of this magnitude in any local paper of and municipality in the world every week, and I'm really confused what an enumeration of "man dies of natural causes while doing X" or "bus hits a car" is doing in an encyclopedia — regardless that those trivial incidents happened in a notable venue. I mean, New York City is notable indeed, but I don't see a list of Traffic accidents in New York City article! — Coren (talk) 18:06, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

The difference is, traffic accidents in New York City do not attract the national attention that accompanies well-documented incidents at Disney parks and other amusement centers. I suppose there's a certain morbid fascination when something goes horribly wrong at "the Happiest Place on Earth". There's plenty of unsourced fancruft on Wikipedia that deserves scrutiny, but this list is well-sourced and fairly discriminate. Uncle Dick (talk) 18:22, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
That might well explain the interest, even if morbid, but not relevance or appropriateness of inclusion. It's darn well sourced — so verifiability isn't a problem — but I really don't see how a cherry picked list of trivial incidents in a specific location can be considered even vaguely neutral or encyclopedic. The fact that other, possibly worse, list/articles exist isn't a reason to keep this one. At best, this is nothing but a partial list of loosely geographically located events with no relation to one another ("Guest altercations"? Really? Why not List of fistfights in Hilton hotels?); and at worse it's nit picking to find fault with Disney. I don't believe this belongs. — Coren (talk) 18:46, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
I agree with you, Coren. I especially don't see the need for entries about visitors being arrested for fighting, even for spitting on other guests or whatever. As far as "incidents" at Disney attractions I'd much rather read about stuff like John Lennon signing the papers that formally disolved the Beatles while he was staying at the Polynesian Village (I think this is recorded in the article for the resort.) PurpleChez (talk) 18:28, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Theme parks are considered to be safe places to bring one's family for a day's entertainment. While a "thrill ride" is intended to be "thrilling", it's not intended to kill or maim someone. Summarizing incidents that occur can help raise issues of safety, maintenance, or whether frivolous lawsuits are being brought against a company for "causing" a death that later is ruled to have been due to natural causes. You will note that the page editors have taken great care to write as neutrally as possible, as these pages do not exist to serve as a "blame game" piece. SpikeJones (talk) 02:23, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Link 71 is dead.--24.241.6.149 (talk) 04:41, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Only Injuries/Deaths?

Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

It seems that this list is mostly injuries/assaults and deaths. I read this book called something like "Behind the Ears" which had part of it about bad events at the parks and there was a lot more than is listed here. Two incidents I remember is a cast member who had rigged up a camera to take upskirt pictures of guests and some guy who fired off a gun on the Haunted Mansion ride. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.63.26.101 (talk) 19:27, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

This is the most retarded article on Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.207.253.101 (talk) 21:15, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

I'd have phrased it a little differently, but I agree that this is perhaps the least interesting article about the disney resorts that I've ever read. I just don't see the point or the value.PurpleChez (talk) 18:33, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Good start

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Good start, but is far from being an encyclopedia article. Apple8800 (talk) 21:58, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Power Failures

Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

When the Monorail finished boarding on May 31, 2011 to leave the Magic Kingdom, its power failed. I was stuck in there for a couple minutes before they got the air on, then power restarted. Another similar incident came on June 3, 2011 on the Tomorrowland Transit Authority. I was once again stuck there for a minute or two while they resolved the technical difficulties. We were about to enter the Space Mountain area. 69.225.234.32 (talk) 02:45, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm glad things are all right now, but these incidents aren't terribly notable for inclusion. Also, this talk page is not a forum for such discussions. --McDoobAU93 03:11, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Not to mention the monorail has such outages literally every day. The first time we went the monorail was stuck for some reason for like fifteen minutes and for my horrid ordeal of waiting on a platform they gave me a handful (literally, there where thirty something) of blank "Fast Passes" I could use on any attraction at any time for like a year. Great deal.
DOH! 69.225.234.32 (talk) 22:53, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion to add incident

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

See this article for reference to injury on It's a Small World ride in Magic Kingdom: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1994-08-30/features/9408300128_1_barbara-paribanez-ride-small-world — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.20.224.14 (talk) 19:15, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

  Done. Thanks for the suggestion ... if you see another cited incident like this, be bold and add it yourself next time. :) --McDoobAU93 19:46, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Neutrality of section

Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I have posted a flag for the Epcot section. "He blew his head clean off and was dead that instant but Disney made sure that he was not pronounced dead until he was off of their property." does not use proper encycolpeic language or neutrality and is not verifiable. Af firefighter34 (talk) 11:13, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

  Done The sentence has been removed from the section. Thanks for finding that! --McDoobAU93 15:45, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Regulation?

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

There does not seem to be any systematic coverage of what government agencies, if any, regulate health and safety at fixed-location theme parks. If there is coverage elsewhere in Wikipedia, it's not pointed to very clearly from this article. There is some mention of the topic at [1], but this is probably not a definitive source of information on the subject. Can anybody add useful information? Reify-tech (talk) 22:39, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

There is no special department regulating theme parks. It's not a loophole however, they are under all regulations anyone else is. OSHA, H&HS, DoT, DoL, ect ect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.244.215.110 (talk) 07:22, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

In References Section, all links (inclusive) from #75 to #82 are dead. Jamesrmiles (talk) 15:47, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

The River Country Incident Back in 1980

Latest comment: 9 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

According to the Disney River Country article, there was an 11 year old boy that was killed by a deadly disease called Naegleria fowleri in 1980 after it entered through his nasal passage. Although River Country has been closed since 2001, it would still be a good idea to put this incident on the article. Could someone put this incident on the article and find out more info about it? --75.68.122.13 (talk) 15:00, 10 May 2015 (UTC)Jacob Chesley the Alternate Historian

You might want to get other opinions, but the source used in the Disney River Country article does not seem very reliable. See WP:RS. That's not to say the incident is untrue, but some of the facts might be questionable. If you can find better sourcing, you could make the edit. But if you need help, ask here or place {{helpme}} on your talk page. Sundayclose (talk) 15:59, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
I think I found a source, Sundayclose. It's this: http://www.yesterland.com/rivercountry.html

I'm not sure if this is accurate, but the site does tell about the 1980 death at the park. Also, according to my source, there were two drownings that occurred in 1982 and in 1989. --75.68.122.13 (talk) 19:32, 28 May 2015 (UTC)Jacob Chesley the Alternate Historian

While I appreciate your attempt at sourcing this, I must tell you that Yesterland is a fan-written site, and such sites are not considered reliable for the basis of a Wikipedia edit. --McDoobAU93 19:43, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Incidents at Walt Disney World. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:03, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Incidents at Walt Disney World. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:16, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Incidents at Walt Disney World. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:49, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Incidents at Walt Disney World. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:04, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Incidents at Walt Disney World. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:50, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Incidents at Walt Disney World. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:22, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Revert the page move

Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

I would like to revert the page move that was made by an editor with good faith in 2017, in order to keep this page in line with all the other existing Incidents at **** articles.

I was going to BE BOLD and just attempt to do the move/redirect myself, but I didn't want to cause a redirect loop by mistake.

Current page: List of incidents at Walt Disney World
Desired page: Incidents at Walt Disney World

Can someone assist with this, please? The reversion I'm referring to is this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Incidents_at_Walt_Disney_World&oldid=784981672

(It also appears that there may be a history of TALK page items that may have gotten lost in the shuffle as well. I hope that the reversion of the page move helps restore those.

Thanks for your help. SpikeJones (talk) 01:29, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

It appears that this would also need to be done on the Tokyo Disney incidents page, and the Disneyland Paris incidents page as well. SpikeJones (talk) 03:35, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 18 July 2018

Latest comment: 6 years ago6 comments4 people in discussion
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: retain the current titles at this time, per the discussion below. Since the pages have been at their current titles for over a year, it is reasonable to consider the current titles the stable titles. No outside support for the proposal was expressed over the course of this discussion. If it is necessary to move other articles to list titles to maintain consistency, please consider a new multimove request for those articles. Dekimasuよ! 21:58, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

– The collection of amusement park incident pages have been well established to follow the "Incidents at..." title nomenclature when they were established circa June 2006, with additional breakout pages created circa October 2010. These three pages were renamed in June 2017 after 11 years of significant SEO usage and references under its original title, but no adjustments were made to all the other amusement park Incident pages to match. These articles should be moved back to their original names please. I was going to BE BOLD to make the change directly, but didn't want to cause an unnecessary redirect loop in the process due to the existence of current redirects. SpikeJones (talk) 04:00, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose - these are formatted as lists. -- Netoholic @ 08:56, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose. These are clearly lists and should be titled as such. Rreagan007 (talk) 20:46, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - All the related Incidents at ******* pages use the "Incidents at ***" nomenclature, and have since they were created in 2006-2010. There are three Disney-related pages that were moved to "List of..." titles without any concern of keeping consistency and linkages similar throughout the entire Incidents family. That the move was not noticed until now is an oversight by the editors most familiar with these pages' content. These are not lists in the traditional WP sense, but well-documented/footnoted summary grouping of historical events. SpikeJones (talk) 22:08, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Grand Floridian Gator Attack

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I thought I remember the alligator attack at the Grand Floridian had its own article. Did it get taken down? If so, does anyone know where I can find talk pages for removed articles (if they exist)? Scientificaldan (talk) 01:29, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Buzzy stolen from Epcot is an incident?

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

2607:FCC8:6DC3:F400:CA5:545:1853:91FB (talk) 01:41, 25 December 2018 (UTC) https://www.news965.com/news/local/animatronic-from-cranium-command-attraction-stolen-disney-epcot/sA02tD2GeYw9jzxYlwpiyM/

Employee vs. Cast member

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Shouldn't Wikipedia use the accurate term of employee rather than the corporate-branding term of 'cast member'?Eccekevin (talk) 01:15, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

I would agree, we should not use in-universe terms, just as we avoid in-universe sources. — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 17:07, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Notable incidents

Latest comment: 4 years ago13 comments4 people in discussion

The lead claims this is a "a summary of notable incidents" and that "incidents" refers to "major injuries, deaths, loss (or injury), or significant crimes". If this is not a tautology the article should not only be restricted to major injuries, deaths, loss (or injury), or significant crimes, but to a subset of these that are considered notable. So which is it, and are we going to define notable other than by WP:N? I suggest we remove the word "notable", and then scope of the list is then clear.----Pontificalibus 06:44, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Note I have also trimmed incidents from the article that either don't meet any reasonable definition of "notable", or are not "major injuries, deaths, loss (or injury), or significant crimes" or that only have a tangential connection to the park.----Pontificalibus 07:56, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

First let me say thanks for raising the issue here. I think we can work toward determining the criteria for including items in the article, but I am very much opposed to removing the word "notable". This article has a history of often insincere (and some made in good faith) additions of silly edits (such as a child crying because he had to wait in line, or someone getting a minor cut while on a ride). Removing the word "notable" almost certainly will invite such edits. I understand that we have an issue defining "notable", but I think it will be counterproductive to turn the article into a crap magnet that requires lots of cleanup. Similar articles that have had such problems are Misnomer and List of common misconceptions. There have been times when those articles got completely out of control until some guidelines were established. Those guidelines were determined by consensus but not based on WP:N. As for what is notable, I'm open to discussion, but I don't think we are locked into WP:N since we are talking about notability of individual items in the list, not the notability of an entire article. Some of the items clearly fit "major injuries, deaths, loss (or injury), or significant crimes". Others are in a gray area that may need to be determined on an individual basis, and may require discussion here. An example that comes to mind is an incident in which a teenager posing for a photo with Goofy grabbed Goofy's costume in a way that the actor in the costume had difficulty breathing. The actor reacted by pushing the kid down. Probably not a crime, but a significant incident in my opinion; it was reported in the media. I think many of the entries will be clear-cut, but there'll be others that require some judgment that may need discussion here if there's disagreement.
I don't necessarily agree with all the removals you recently made, although I haven't looked at them in detail. But that's for another discussion if necessary. Sundayclose (talk) 16:52, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
I think most people coming to this article would expect to find a list of deaths or serious injuries on rides, along with other major incidents involving rides (collisions, people trapped necessitating rescues etc). I don't think that assaults on staff or fights between guests should be included. The reason for this is that we wouldn't include such incidents on Wikipedia if they happened outside the park (whereas we would mention e.g. mass transit and light rail crashes or deaths in appropriate list articles). An exception might be made where there are important court cases that set a precedence or result in new laws or regulations. I don't see that Mickey Mouse accidentally knocking over little Joe and braking his wrist result in a $15k court case is significant in any way.----Pontificalibus 13:35, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
We have a good faith disagreement about guests vs. staff physical altercations. Although not all of them should be included, it's the fact that they are in the park that could make them notable. Certainly if two people get in a fight outside the park Wikipedia would not report it. But the article is about WDW, which is known for it's family friendly, safe atmosphere. We don't need to include arguments between guests and staff, but I think some altercations within the park that receive significant press coverage could merit inclusion. I think the Goofy vs. teenager example could be one of those. But I certainly think those may need to be decided on an individual basis. I would prefer to discuss such an occasional incident rather than open the flood gates for the silly entries that would ensue from removing the word "notable". Sundayclose (talk) 15:08, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
I'm of the opinion that unless said altercation becomes something that affects the whole park, like Yippie Day at Disneyland, or it leads to a serious injury, it should not be included. Every altercation that gets reported is not notable enough for here, or it will definitely lead to too much crud. Elisfkc (talk) 01:22, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for your comment, and I'm not trying to be argumentative. But I have watched and cleaned up this article for years. There is no history of crud about physical altercations that receive press coverage (as the Goofy incident did). Other crud (especially unsourced) yes, but not physical altercations with reliable sources. If two siblings get in a fight, probably no reliable sources. A teenager tries to suffocate Goofy and gets pushed down, there is media coverage. Sundayclose (talk) 01:42, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
I don't think the existence of media coverage should be sufficient to warrant inclusion. We say this is a list of "notable" incidents and not merely anything which can be "reliably sourced". Routine assaults/arrests such as this or this definitely fall into the "crud" category in my opinion - they don't comply with second part of our inclusion criteria in the lead, namely "major injuries, deaths, loss (or injury), or significant crimes". I think this phrase is fine, and if we can get the current article to comply with it we should be good going forward.----Pontificalibus 06:32, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
I would agree that media coverage alone is not sufficient without discussion here; that's true for all of Wiikpedia. But I also think there could be a few notable exceptions to a rigid standard for inclusion that can be determined on this talk page if necessary. There are a few notable incidents in the article right now that are not "major injuries, deaths, loss (or injury), or significant crimes". Incidents like those would usually be up for discussion. The more clear-cut cases would not require discussion. That's what the consensus process is for. A number of articles follow that pattern. Someone adds an item; if no one objects it stays. If there is objection it is either permanently removed or there's discussion on the talk page. It's Wikipedia's imperfect system, but it often works out OK. Sundayclose (talk) 23:49, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Tagging @Epicgenius and McDoobAU93: to join the conversation. Elisfkc (talk) 03:08, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

I agree, but we really should try and tweak our inclusion criteria to match as closely as possible the incidents which we want to include. This makes things easier for everyone and will help to ensure the list doesn't creep away from the consensus. You mention a few notable incidents in the list right now that don't otherwise meet the current criteria - are there any common elements amongst these incidents that could be used to expand the criteria, or on the other hand should all of these incidents remain on the list? ----Pontificalibus 06:44, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Elisfkc, thanks for the ping. In my opinion, we should definitely include incidents such as deaths, as well as other incidents that affected the whole park or significantly impacted the operation of the ride. For items such as the Tigger lawsuit, I think we should determine if it has sufficient coverage in reliable sources, and provide a brief summary. I do think that items like seizures, fights between patrons, monorail outages, etc. shouldn't really be covered at all, since they are relatively minor. epicgenius (talk) 14:52, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments Epicgenius. A couple of possible exceptions to the standard criteria (not an exhaustive list): Guests placed in prolonged, stressful experiences (e.g., stranded on a vehicle or ride that gets stuck for hours requiring emergency rescue); serious physical altercations between employees and guests (not between guests unless there is serious injury or crime; this one would require some judgment and possibly consensus; a consideration could be malicious intent to harm). As for media coverage, the source(s) would need to be more than a local news story. I may add others when I have time to look through the article. Sundayclose (talk) 15:28, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

4-year old boy Mission Space Incident

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

According to this article: https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/disney-settles-lawsuit-after-boys-death-20070131-gdpd7x.html The reason the case was dismissed with prejudice is that Disney settled. Also, some of the details about why the parents sued are different between the Wiki version and in the newspaper. The currently cited link to the court case is not accessible without logging into the website cited, making it difficult to check and see if the currently cited information actually conflicts with the news article or if the sentence was written in a misleading way. I think this part needs to be updated since it reads as if the case was dismissed because the court found error when it seems Disney settled it and that was the reason it was dismissed. 2601:245:C100:5E5C:8913:D383:AC3E:E2DB (talk) 13:42, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Removing or editing the section about COVID-19

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I want to know if it would be okay to edit the section about COVID-19 in Walt Disney World, as it is extremely outdated and the parks were given to interact with characters again back in April of 2022, and I have provided a few articles that back up my claim which even includes an article published back in March 2022 from Disney themselves about it returning --HistorianL (talk) 17:52, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

https://disneyparks.disney.go.com/blog/2022/03/disney-character-greetings-returning-to-u-s-sites-this-spring/

https://www.fox35orlando.com/news/disney-world-character-meet-and-greets-return-with-no-social-distancing

https://www.disneytouristblog.com/character-meet-greets-return-disney-world/

Animal Kingdom snake incident

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

There was an incident at Animal Kingdom involving a snake, so should it be on the page?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:18d:4980:90:f053:74af:fc07:c0e8 (talk) 19:01, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Mad cow disease case

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

In 2000, there was a 15-year-old girl from the United Kingdom who died of mad cow disease when she was deteriorating every day on a family trip to Disney World. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:18D:4700:2D30:5873:B5A1:D69E:AFAD (talk) 11:05, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Employee gets crushed and two boys drown

Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I can’t remember exactly what happened in both these situations but I know a young employee who was working at the now closed America Sings attraction was accidentally crushed by the moving walls of the ride. Also not sure if this one even happened but two boys tried to swim back from Tom Sawyer island back to the main park but drowned in the lake surrounding the island (attraction) 47.184.49.35 (talk) 09:42, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

The crush incident was at Disneyland, not Disney World. Covered at List of incidents at Disneyland Resort § America Sings. Funnyfarmofdoom (talk to me) 20:16, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

References

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

References 165 and 166 are the same source, yet “Disney Beach Club Resort”, which uses reference 166, does not match the article. Nothing about a “37-year-old female guest suffer[ing] a 3 inch laceration…” is mentioned in reference 166. Tankpiggy18 (talk) 14:00, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Naming Victims

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

There is said to be a "precedent" of not naming victims on this page. It is true that the victims are rarely named, but I can find no such policy anywhere. In any case, why? These are public events and there is surely no violation of anyone's privacy. Naming the victims makes it much easier to find additional information about it. In the case I just dealt with, where the description of the incident didn't make sense and the reference link was dead, it would have been much easier to find the information I eventually found if the victim had been named.Bill (talk) 03:23, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_incidents_at_Walt_Disney_World/Archive_1&oldid=1241835350"