Talk:World of Color

World of Color Show

oh my goodness the construction has started! it's so exciting!!! there's new viewing areas for the public that are being built (like the current amphiteater) and the entire lagoon is just bare empty, YES! Disney finally got the hint! I so so sooooo hope that it rivals the Bellagio fountains. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.182.80.240 (talk) 03:40, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Requested Move

Walt Disney's Wonderful World of Color (Theme park show) → Disney's World of Color — At the official California Adventure website, the press release, and Steven Davison's preview, this show is referred to without the word "Wonderful" in its title. 76.200.171.61 (talk) 19:32, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. Jafeluv (talk) 05:14, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Requested Move

Disney's World of Color → World of Color — At the official World of Color website, this show is referred to without "Disney's" in its title. 76.229.199.241 (talk) 22:05, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Abandoned Concepts

I think there should be a section detailing elements such as Little Squirt and the Alice in Wonderland sequence, that were mentioned in Steve Davison's preview, but ultimately removed from the show. 76.229.150.141 (talk) 17:25, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

End date for Tron: Legacy Encore

69.119.147.233 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) has repeatedly removed the ending date for the Tron: Legacy encore from the Show Summary section, leaving it with just the starting date. As it stands now, it seems like the starting date is the only date of the encore, which is incorrect. To avoid running into WP:3RR issues I'm not going to restore it again and instead would like to bring it up for discussion here as to how to handle this. -- Hawaiian717 (talk) 19:25, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

If you can find a source that shows the finish date of the encore include it in the article. Sometimes this is enough to deter some users. Otherwise a block may be necessary considering the amount of warnings they have received on their talk page. Themeparkgc  Talk  22:52, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Show summary

I think we should expand the show summary section and provide elaboration on the scenes and sequences that take place during the show, akin to Fantasmic!. One possibility of accomplishing this task would be turning the whole section into prose. If we decide not to take that approach and instead keep the summary at its current, rudimentary format, we could at least, translate it from a bullet list and into a chart. Thoughts? ~ Jedi94 (talk) 03:16, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Prose is definitely the way to go if someone was willing to put in the effort. I personally don't know enough about the show to be able to accomplish this task. A chart could be a good interim measure though. Themeparkgc  Talk  04:04, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Themeparkgc, it should always be written in prose if possible. A chart would work too because it would be a little more organized.--Astros4477 (talk) 04:11, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and did my best to translate the section into prose. I'd like to hear your thoughts on how well I managed to do the task and if it needs any further improvements. ~ Jedi94 (talk) 21:21, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Very nicely written. The grammatical variety in your sentences weaves things together really nicely so that the section doesn't feel like just a hastily-glued-together list of moments. It has a great flow. If there's anything you can nip and tuck to make it even more concise and streamlined, I would recommend it. Partly because any patterns of concision established now will multiply in their positive impact down the road, and partly because Wikipedia tries to keep these sections as short as possible, so they don't become blow-by-blow recountings. WP guidelines say plot summaries "should not cover every scene and every moment of a story", and the same applies to synopses of shows that don't really have a "story", though the lack of a story in a complex multimedia show like this undoubtedly makes it even harder to decide which elements are essential to include in a synopsis and which are not. I don't know the show well enough to have an opinion on whether it'd be safe to gloss over some of the brief transitional moments (e.g., "Heimlich is blown away", "Silence momentarily takes over the bay..."). I can tell you have already put a lot of effort into streamlining everything, and what you've come up with so far is an effort worthy of generous praise. I think it just needs a bit of paring down to comply with Wikipedia's usual standards for synopses. AtticusX (talk) 22:53, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the encouraging words! Yes, I have to admit, it was hard to try to summarize World of Color, since it has such an abstract narrative to it. As an added note; I had the current version of the show as the basis for the synopsis I wrote, as opposed to the version when it premiered (the changes are mentioned in the footnotes).

I'm going to continue to alter it, to comply with Wikipedia's guidelines. ~ Jedi94 (talk) 23:10, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

World of Color Celebrate

I have put in new info regarding World of Color Celebrate! The Wonderful World of Walt Disney and my changes always seem to be removed. It is hard work adding the new info and it is completely accurate. I have cited sources and all this info is things I've seen from testing footage I watch LIVE. So once again please do not remove anything that is added about World of Color Celebrate! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johensonthe3rd (talk • contribs) 21:33, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

@Johensonthe3rd: I believe what you saw, but unfortunately, all information on Wikipedia must be backed up with citations to reliable sources, and message board posts and personal accounts are not considered reliable sources. Besides, just because something was tested doesn't mean it will be in the final show (see "little squirt", Chernabog, and Alice in Wonderland in the original "World of Color" show). --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 22:02, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

World of Color Celebrate!

So last week there was a Media Event showcasing the new things that will be in this new show. I know that some things are added in here but we should add something on the new effects. Like the Lights, Projections, the amount Walt Disney appears in the show, and more info that they released. If you do add things about the effects. I have photos and other things and the LA Times and OC Register has some good articles about the info too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johensonthe3rd (talk • contribs) 06:36, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

World of Color Celebrate!

So last week there was a Media Event showcasing the new things that will be in this new show. I know that some things are added in here but we should add something on the new effects. Like the Lights, Projections, the amount Walt Disney appears in the show, and the info about the show that was released during the Media Event last week. Also the I've seen that the show is far in progress that it would be too hard to add or remove anything from the show. I know the LA Times and OC Register have some good articles and I have some pictures I can put up that I took of the new effects and lights. I just wanted to see if it was okay if I could add this info. Also I'm wondering if this show can now be it's own section on this page because it is a pretty big show that is built as Steve Davison said "from the ground up not a little thing added to the end." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johensonthe3rd (talk • contribs) 06:40, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:World of Color/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Removed information from sidebar that was unverified and/or rumor.69.230.38.53 (talk) 04:26, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Substituted at 18:46, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Updates.

All of the lighting info, and half of the technical uses incorrect terminology, and has incorrect lighting info, as of current. 2600:6C48:647F:70EE:6CF5:91C2:44B7:67CC (talk) 06:48, 31 December 2022 (UTC)