Talk:Park MGM/Archive 1

Archive 1

Tram to Bellagio

• I don't believe the Monte Carlo has a tram to any other property. Does anyone have a any more information about this?
  • I removed the reference to the tram, since no one responded. Please add back if someone can find information on this. --Ben 04:25, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

There used to be a tram but it is closed indefinitely due to construction. -- Komandorski Maru

Not sure where one might find a source for this, but the City Center tram that connects Bellagio to Crystals has at its southern terminal end a stop with access to both Aria and Monte Carlo. 161.225.196.111 (talk) 03:16, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Monte Carlo Micro Brewery

I would like to add a link to a grass roots organization that is dedicated to bringing back the brewery to the Monte Carlo Brew Pub, but my link was taken down. I don't believe I was violating any Wikipedia policies in adding it, as it is relevant to the site. There is a significant number of people who miss the Monte Carlo's microbrewery as it was the only one on the Las Vegas Strip. Since its dismantling was mentioned previously in the article, I feel it is relevant. People can decide for themselves if they want to go there or not. Can we please add this? Thank you. Sundevil4life 00:22, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:External links and you will see why it was removed. The section labeled 'Links normally to be avoided' probably is the most relevant for you. Vegaswikian 05:08, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:MonteCarloLogo.jpg

Image:MonteCarloLogo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:08, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:MonteCarloLogo.jpg

Image:MonteCarloLogo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 07:44, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Upon taking a closer look, this logo appearing in the Infobox is no longer current. In the interest of accuracy, I've updated the logo to the present, most current version. This updated logo also contains a comprehensive fair use explanation, which was not present on the previous version. This should address the image copyright tag that has been present above for quite awhile now.

Along with this, I've made a minor edit, removing this image from the "Construction and opening" section. At the time this image was taken (June, 2006), it accurately depicted one corner of the Monte Carlo Resort and Casino, as seen from Las Vegas Blvd. Since then, the section of the property shown in this photo has undergone significant changes, as a restaurant Diablo's Cantina was constructed in its place. If anyone has a suggestion for new images to replace this one, let me know of your thoughts -- I'd be happy to work to obtain any under free use that you feel would be relevant/helpful. Cheers, Jeff Bedford (talk) 21:16, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

What's the building covered with?

The way flaming bits are falling and dripping off, with the thick, black smoke, makes me think it's covered with Dryvit or similar plastic "stucco". Those products are applied over shaped styrene foam, with a plastic or fiberglass mesh over the foam to help hold the Dryvit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bizzybody (talk • contribs) 12:58, 25 January 2008

CNN is reporting that the facade is made of stucco and foam, so it's probably what you're talking about --clpo13_(talk) 20:00, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I can see in closeups on FNC that's what it is, white, melted foam where the burned stuff has fallen away. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bizzybody (talk • contribs) 20:13, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Protection

I have protected the article for 6 hours to stop the vandalism that has already occurred and that comes with high-visibility current events. After the 6 hours period, we can re-evaluate whether further protection is needed. the sprotect will allow autoconfirmed editors to maintain the article during the event.↔NMajdan•talk 20:04, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Following up on the note above, this article received significant attention in January 2008 and the months following, and while it is certainly a notable event in the hotel’s history, the current version had evolved into an expansive and in some cases repetitive section, which was larger than any other portion of the article. To be sure, while this coverage is factual and worthy of its own section(titled "2008 fire"), the section as a whole was disproportionate to its overall significance to the article topic, gave undue weight to this event in the larger context of this article.

In working to bring this article up to date and up to Wikipedia’s own standards, I’ve taken care to update this section in a way that reflects WP:WEIGHT, WP:NEWSEVENT and WP:NOT#NEWS. Of note, as I’ve referenced previously in the Expansion and Revision of Article section of this talk page, MGM Resorts International (the owner of Monte Carlo Resort and Casino) is a client of my employer, so I do have a potential conflict of interest. In making these updates I have been careful to only put forth changes that are beneficial to the subject at hand and closely follow Wikipedia's policies regarding WP:NPOV, WP:VERIFY, WP:COI and WP:RELIABLE. If you have any questions about my editing activity on this page, please feel welcome to reach out to me. Thanks, Jeff Bedford (talk) 19:12, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Removal of Reference Links

What is Wikipedia's policies regarding dead links that are located in the Reference section of an article? I've found at least one dead link and originally I was going to replace it with an archived version from the Internet Archives but unfortunately it's blocked from being actively archived at IA and I'd to remove it completely but I don't want to upset a fellow Wikipedian or administrator by doing something I'm not suppose to. Rosie, Queen of Corona (talk) 06:04, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Take a look at this. As I read that it says deactivate the link and leave as much as possible there. I'll also note that I may need to do the same thing for the first reference since it causes problems for users not using Internet Explorer. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:28, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Theatre Lobby

Very minor quibble. Very minor change. The lobby is fashioned after London west end threatre lobbies (hence the British spelling in Lance's theater name), not after any new york style. Mindme (talk) 17:36, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Expansion and Revision of Article

I made the first of what should be a few changes to this page a few minutes ago. I have made these edits with the effort to bring the article up to date, improve readability, and structure it in a logical organization. I have also sought to back up both past and present content stated in the article by citing reliable sources where they did not previously exist.

Let me state first that MGM Resorts International (the owner of Monte Carlo Resort and Casino) is a client of my employer, and as such, others should be aware that I have a potential conflict of interest. However, I don’t think it will get in the way of improving the accuracy of this article and bringing it up to Wikipedia’s own standards. I plan to make additional edits soon, and I’ll ensure that all such edits are well-sourced and explained with Wikipedia policies and guidelines in mind. While I don’t believe any of my changes will be controversial I recognize that others may see things differently, and I am more than happy to discuss any of my edits. Thanks, Jeff Bedford (talk) 01:36, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Monte Carlo Resort and Casino. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hnsM4qs-zsIbSVD4cVZpDQPAdi3wD8UDEK700
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131206192427/http://www.hospitalitydesign.com/hospitalitydesign/content_display/industry-news/e3i2ea12a163e397089686a6508aee37173 to http://www.hospitalitydesign.com/hospitalitydesign/content_display/industry-news/e3i2ea12a163e397089686a6508aee37173
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721075659/http://www.montecarlo.com/offers/2009/04_hotel32/flash.html to http://www.montecarlo.com/offers/2009/04_hotel32/flash.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 23:39, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Separate Article for Park Theater?

The Park Theater is going to be hosting a lot of different residencies and other events. Perhaps the venue should have its own page. Thoughts? --MusicAndArtFan (talk) 15:09, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

A section should generally be split from an article only after it grows too large. The section on the Park Theater is pretty small at this point. If it grows overly large as more encyclopedic content is added, then a split might be appropriate. Toohool (talk) 21:45, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Sounds good! --MusicAndArtFan (talk) 23:09, 27 December 2018 (UTC)