Talk:Rock-a-Hoola

First-hand experience
I'm excited that an editor with obvious first-hand experience is adding to this former stub. It's an interesting piece of history and certainly notable considering the millions of people who have driven by to and from Vegas from California and scratched their heads at a waterpark in the middle of the desert. I'm hoping the anonymous editor will create an account so we can discuss the tone of an encyclopedia vs. a personal essay... Ifnord 02:42, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, lfnord!!!
Being a filmaker, my "creative approach" (as it were) is to "overwrite" along with crafting the body to be as personal as possible, then edit down and make it gradually more distant dy "deduction and removal" (to the degree as deemed necessary---hopefully I more-often-than-not hit my mark, and that's the greater challenge), relative to genre, subject, content, design, theme, color, tone, etc., of course.

Being new to this wonderful place, I know that I "saved" my work far too early. Nevertheless lfnord, I need you to be hard as hell on me, because you've made me better already, and I need to endlessly continue that process---equal to the fact that Wikipedia and it's inherent level of quality is so important to me. I was one of Wikipedia's very first "fans", and to this day proudly continue to "Spread the Word" about one of my very favorite web locales.

You're the best!

Thanks...

Shouldn't This Article Be Listed Under The Heading Of "Lake Delores"?
Shouldn't this article be listed under the heading of "Lake Delores", as opposed to the current heading of "Rock-A-Hoola" (The sheer number of people that relate the former as opposed to the latter name to the locale as well as to the overall experience has to be a ratio of at least 50 to 1)? After all, hmmm... let's see... we know it as "Lake Delores" for a period of 45 years, versus "Rock-A-Hoola" for a period of 4 years. (I would understand the argument to maintain the status-quo if the park was still in business, and not "defunct" as it is now. Since that is not the case, however, I feel that I have a legitimate position). Shouldn't the park be listed under what it is (or was) most commonly known for the longest period of time? After all, even the billboard in the article's photo has the name "Lake Delores" on it. Therefore, shouldn't the re-direct come from "Rock-A-Hoola" to "Lake Delores" instead? Or, at the very least, shouldn't the two names possibly be combined on the header? To wit: Possibly "Lake Delores/Rock-A-Hoola", or possibly even better -- "Lake Delores aka Rock-A-Hoola"?

Maybe I'm missing something here. Is there some rule or protocol pertaining to this type of situation? Is there some sort of a universally or locally acceptable versus unacceptable cognisance of "Length of time" for name recognition cut-off or changeover?

Please illuminate my relative dimnity. All opinions would be greatly appreciated! -[LogicallyCreative]


 * I think that's appropriate, will do it. Ifnord 17:55, 26 July 2006 (UTC)