User talk:Damarco4u

Hi there. I moved the trivia you added to Delos to its own section. Flyguy649^talk_contribs 14:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Camden Park Edits

Hi there! I noticed your edits to Camden Park concerning the number of "trolley parks" still existing in the United States, the uniqueness of its location at an interchange, and the timing of its carousel. While I'm sure all of these assertions could be correct, they really ought to have a reliable source they can be cited to, otherwise editors may feel obliged to remove them from the article. Reliable sources include (but aren't limited to) published books, newspaper and magazine articles (but not promotional advertising), or other identifiable media, with page references and dates, if possible. If you can identify a reliable source for these assertions, I invite you to post a source citation with the material in question. Or, if you're not sure how, let me know what it is, and I'll try to do it for you. Thanks! P Aculeius (talk) 16:14, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi, P Aculeius,

I have been editing on Wikipedia for years but I have never "talked" and I am not sure I am doing this right. The whole "talk" thing is confusing. So, I am sorry if I am blowing the protocol.

On my edits, you probably noticed that I did make "trolley parks" clickable, where readers can see the list of 13 parks left operating. I only made a grammatical change to the sentence about amusements being added later, as that sentence was only there.

Regarding the fact Camden Park is unique because it was built where trolley riders changed lines instead of being built at the end of a line, I am not sure it is written anywhere. That is based not on a single easily produced fact, but on the the basis of deduction. When looking at all the other 12 parks, or even those closed, all mention the park being built at the end of a line. While Huntington is not unique with it being part of a multiple city metro, it is the only one I've found that built its trolley parks between its other cities. Raleigh/Durham, Allentown/Bethlehem, Albany/Schenectady, etc. are among the few possible markets for such an idea, and none of them did this. If you can find a source for this, I welcome your input and I appreciate that you didn't make the change on that basis, but offered to help me before someone did.

I am a big follower and researcher of amusement park history in the U.S., and so I am going to all 13 trolley park pages to add this reference to being one of the survivors, in hopes of getting enthusiasts to support these parks and getting locals to protect them.

Thanks so much, and I hope I am doing this talk thing right. LOL!

DamarcoDamarco4u (talk) 16:29, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Talk's rather important in Wikipedia, just like citing to reliable sources. But it's not hard to get the hang of! As you've probably noticed, you don't need to sign posts by typing your name at the end, as there's an automatic protocol for that which adds the date and links to your user page and talk page when you type four tildes. That, and indenting replies by placing colons at the beginning of paragraphs makes it easier to follow conversations. But back to the main point, reliable sources! You'll probably find that some editors will automatically remove anything that you add if it isn't cited to a reliable source. Others will take some time to look and find reliable sources, or at least leave what you add if it seems reasonably likely, with the intention of looking for citable sources later. Which is probably what I'll do in this case. It needs a source at some point, but I suspect that the facts added are correct or nearly correct, and can be supported with additional research, so I'd rather not delete them. Other editors will be tougher on this count, so get used to finding sources, or having your additions reverted, even if you're sure they're accurate! Best of luck, and thanks for helping out! P Aculeius (talk) 19:43, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Turns out I was complicating talk. I was expecting it to be more like exchanges on social media rather then like adding to a Wikipedia page.

I went back to the Camden Park page and changed the "absolute" nature of my language to a broader meaning by changing "unique" to "unusual" and adding the word "most" to the grouping of the others. Though it's something I think could definitely be proven from among the 13 existing parks, it would be impossible to prove it for the defunct parks, though it is probably very likely. I do try to cite sources whenever I can, but sometimes I rely on the reader using the pages see this for themselves. I know we're not supposed to caniblize Wikipedia info, but, at some point, it is all cross referenced.

Thanks for the pleasant exchange! Damarco4u (talk) 20:30, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Trolley parks

According to this source which is cited in the trolley park article (it's primary reference), there are only 11 trolley parks left in the US, and Lake Compounce is not among them. Also in that article, there are no references cited next to Lake Compounce further complicating matters. Please be aware of the policy WP:CIRCULAR, which states that Wikipedia articles can not be used as sources for other articles. Each one must stand on its own with reliable sources contained within. I was looking for a Lake Compounce reference in the trolley park article, so I could move it over to the Lake Compounce article, but I'm not able to find one. If you have one, let me know what it is and I can assist you with getting it properly cited in both articles. Thank you. --GoneIn60 (talk) 17:35, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

The designation of a trolley park and those operating today will likely come from a variety of sources but most importantly, the parks themselves. This source cites that there are 13 but places Bushkill Park in the group, though its operation has been in limbo for over a decade, but with no resolution in sight. I compiled the original list from that 11 you cite and two have since been added to the list, and when I researched them, they did all have trolley park histories. Lake Compounce sees itself as a trolley park, though it was not built by the trolley company but was made successful by not one, but two separate lines, as shown in this article: http://www.bera.org/articles/compounce.html. Whether or not that confirms it to be a trolley park could be subject to debate, but if the rule is that it does not make it a trolley park, then it should be removed from the list on Wikipedia's trolley park page.

Damarco4uDamarco4u (talk) 17:56, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I omitted the source I cited, which is https://www.tripsavvy.com/what-is-a-trolley-park-3225649.

Damarco4uDamarco4u (talk) 18:27, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

OK, I see where the confusion is setting in. A trolley park is usually defined as a recreational area that was built, owned, and/or operated by rail companies in the 1800s. Lake Compounce does not fit in with that categorization. Rail companies eventually adjusted their routes to include Lake Compounce as a destination, but Lake Compounce was NOT founded or operated by the rail companies. Simply being a destination along a trolley route doesn't automatically qualify a recreational area as a trolley park. Furthermore, we really need a source that states "Lake Compounce is a trolley park", and so far, I have not seen that. If you don't have one, I will promptly remove the claim in both articles. Any other open interpretation that you are making could be considered original research which is not permitted in Wikipedia articles. I'm glad that you're trying to improve these articles, but anything that has a chance at being challenged really needs to be accompanied by a reliable source. --GoneIn60 (talk) 18:49, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of people from West Virginia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Shepherdstown. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:19, 4 February 2021 (UTC)