Talk:The Mirage

Title of article

I thought it made more sense to have this article at its original title, Mirage (hotel and casino), in keeping with the style used for other casinos with ambiguous names. (Sometimes it's phrased a little differently, as with Excalibur Hotel and Casino, but that's the general approach.) Whoever moved it didn't change the links to the original title. Does anyone see a reason to keep this article here? If not, I'll see to moving it back. JamesMLane 09:21, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Done, all links fixed. JamesMLane 21:21, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Might have been me, history lost in the move and re-move. "The Mirage" seems like the official name, they use it in their text, and their mailing address is "The Mirage / 3400 S. Las Vegas Blvd. / Las Vegas, NV 89109". In general we want to prefer an official name, if it's unambiguous, over a disambiguated form (thus President of the United States not President (US)). Stan 03:57, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I moved this to "Mirage Las Vegas" because that seems to be an official name, at least according to their web site. As Stan said, we prefer an official name over a disambiguated form. Nohat 07:35, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I don't know if I believe "Mirage Las Vegas" is an official name. From previous poking around I've noticed that the websites are often very confused about terminology, not surprising since they're cobbled together by successive generations of marketroids and website admins. Mailing addresses and court papers are better sources for names sans marketingspeak. One of these days someone should get energetic and just call them on the phone... Stan 14:04, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I agree with preferring the official name, but if, as Stan points out, the subject of the article has left some uncertainty about what the official name is, then there's an advantage to putting the article where people will look for it, and where other editors are likely to link to it. We use the "(hotel and casino)" form on several of our similar articles. Phoning the place wouldn't be at all definitive -- I'd imagine you could get one answer in the morning and then a different one a few hours later when the first person is out to lunch. JamesMLane 15:44, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Heh heh... If one were to actually do this, one would have to locate the right person, most likely in public relations, because they're the ones in charge of "I don't care what you say about me, just as long as you spell my name right", and deal with journalists and proofreaders and such all the time. Practically speaking, I should think a casino's PR person would be ecstatic to find out that a) WP has an article on them, and b) we want to be accurate. Stan 01:52, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The PR people would want to see whatever they judged would sound best, not what was actually true, even if they knew what was true, which they probably wouldn't. Your suggestion, though, got me to thinking: Whom would I trust to be right on a nitpicky detail like this? As a lawyer, I concluded that the answer was: lawyers, particularly those going over the company's SEC filings. I should've thought of this before. I checked the EDGAR database and found the most recent Form 10-K from MGM Mirage (view it here). In "ITEM 1. BUSINESS" it includes a list of the company's properties. (Search for "Bellagio" and it's the first hit.) Based on that listing, I'm reversing my previous position and agreeing that the official name for the volcano joint is "The Mirage". Therefore, our article should go there. The official name for the one with the lake is simply "Bellagio". We can't put our article at that title, though, because of ambiguity, so we should disambiguate using the conventions established for other such articles, by moving it back to Bellagio (hotel and casino). That's also where all the links point now, anyway. The Mirage links, however, are all to Mirage (hotel and casino); I reluctantly conclude that we should change them, after moving the article to The Mirage. Is this resolution acceptable to everyone? JamesMLane 13:42, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Good thinking! That should be mentioned somewhere on the naming conventions pages, as a way to sort dubious names. Stan 16:19, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Well, give that the name on the building is The Mirage in the picture on the page that seems reasonable. Vegaswikian 06:38, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

No one has objected to my suggestion, so I'm moving the article to The Mirage. I'll start the project of changing the links but I may not finish them all today, and everyone else is welcome to join the fun. JamesMLane 04:19, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC) Well, I thought I could move it, since The Mirage is just a redirect, but it wouldn't let me, presumably because of the history. I'll do a formal request for page move. JamesMLane 04:34, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. There may well be a book or movie named "The Mirage" (though none spring to mind). In that case this should be moved elsewhere but for now I agree that The Mirage is the best place for this casino. violet/riga (t) 17:43, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Fixed most redirects. Did not do the page with a VfD. Vegaswikian 20:42, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

"Major blow"

I don't think anybody knowledgeable could think that losing Siegfried & Roy was not a major blow to the Mirage, that's working just a little too hard to excise opinion. Making summarized assessments is a part of history writing - we have thousands of history articles that do this, they in turn get their assessments from respected books and journal articles. If the assessment is controversial (the cause of the American Civil War), we attribute the opinions, but if they're not controversial, we just state them and don't worry about it. Stan 3 July 2005 12:38 (UTC)

notable attractions?

is "Aquarium" really an attraction here? Sure, it's nice and all behind the front desk, but it's no "Shark Reef". I don't see people lining up to look at it as they do the Volcano or the White Tiger exhibit. Do you? SpikeJones 11:46, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Marquee

The article ways that The Mirage is home to the largest free standing marquee in the world. From my understanding, that bit of trivia belongs to The Hilton Las Vegas. Anyone else agree? Guy M 11:15, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Is it true can anyone find article/facts that The Mirage was named such because the way the hotel is shaped that from any room in the hotel you can not see part of the hotel besides the marque and volcano? This would also make sense from the definition of a mirage and being in the middle of the desert? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.55.45.13 (talk) 19:13, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Trivia

"The Mirage does not have a wedding chapel."

How is that interesting at all? That's like saying there isn't an airport in the mirage

Nearly all of the LV megacasinos incorporate a wedding chapel - the Mirage is therefore unusual in not having one. (The article should make it clearer that this is not the norm for casinos of its type.) Stan 02:55, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Glass Pool Inn

The Mirage was originally a motel on the south part of the strip until the Mirage casino was built. May be an interesting fact. http://www.roadsidepeek.com/preserv/2004/glasspool/ 4613 Las Vegas Blvd S, Las Vegas, NV 89119

thanks -- already covered elsewhere in WP. (I believe the Las Vegas Strip article has this included. SpikeJones 11:20, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Connection to the Jackie Collins novel Chances?

Jackie Collin's entertaining 1981 sex-and-violence novel Chances includes, as a salient plot element, the building of a luxurious Las Vegas hotel and casino called the Mirage. E.g., p. 399 of the paperback,

“ It'll be the biggest an' the best!" Jake enthused. "I want to call it the Mirage. Every star in Hollywood'll come to the opening. It'll be the best hotel in the whole friggin' world! ”

Was Wynn inspired by the novel? Pure coincidence ? Precognition on Collin's part? Dpbsmith (talk) 18:26, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Junk bonds

I put a reference request on first resort built with junk bonds request. That should probably be quantified to "in Las Vegas" Michael Milliken had a partnership with Wynn on the Golden Nugget Atlantic City which preceded the Mirage. I have a reference on the Atlantic City article.Americasroof (talk) 12:29, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned references in The Mirage

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of The Mirage's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "lat":

• From Casino Royale Hotel & Casino: http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jan/09/news/la-trb-las-vegas-casino-royale-20130108
• From Aria Resort and Casino: Powers, Ashley (December 21, 2009). "Vegas places a huge bet on its newest showcase". Los Angeles Times. p. a–15.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 22:47, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Capitalization

Should references to "The Mirage" after the initial word of the sentence have "The" capitalized? MOS:THECAPS seems to indicate lowercase, unless this is more like an exception like "The Open Championship".

Example: "Prior to The Mirage's opening" vs. "Prior to the Mirage's opening" Kaltenmeyer (talk) 17:25, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia is inconsistent about to handle this. We write the Spice Girls and the White House, but we write The Coca-Cola Company and The New York Times. I would say to use lowercase the in all situations except titles of works, so "the Mirage", not "The Mirage". See my essay for more thoughts on this. Popcornfud (talk) 18:05, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

I agree; don't cap it except at start of sentence. Dicklyon (talk) 03:17, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Right, this is a typical MOS:THECAPS case. And, no, we don't write "The Coca-Cola Company". If anyone's doing that, they're making a mistake. Nor do we write "The New York Times"; we write The New York Times, because titles of publications have an entirely separate guideline about capitalization, italics/quotation marks, etc.; see MOS:TITLES. For all the guidelines dealing with "the" vs. "The", see the internal disambiguation page MOS:THE.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  15:07, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Considering adding a Super Bowl event in here... "Paramount Expedition Vegas"?

It happened a week prior to super bowl 58, aka "super bowl week" within the volanco/lagoon area. Does it demonstrate enough coverage to add it here? I feel like it's missing some details about it... lmk on my talk page or by replying here. thanks! Ｍｏｄ ｃｒｅａｔｏｒ 🏡 🗨 📝 05:23, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

I have added a mention of this, as seen here.  AJFU  (talk), 14:58, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

New page for Hard Rock?

Even though The Mirage is not being demolished, the property will certainly be completely different when it turns into the Hard Rock. I’m wondering if a new page for The Hard Rock should be created. Does anyone see this as being a good idea?

Or could we just make a separate page called “History of The Mirage”? That could be a reasonable compromise for those who don’t want a new page for the Hard Rock. There is a lot of history to The Mirage and it has had an important legacy on Las Vegas.

Anyway, these are some of my ideas. I’m just wondering how everyone else may feel. --LasVegasGirl93 (talk) 23:35, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

There will certainly be a separate page for Hard Rock Las Vegas, but that's probably a couple years down the road, when there are more details available. For now, the project is adequately covered here. The current Mirage article already covers its history and isn't large enough to justify splitting off into a new article.  AJFU  (talk) 16:24, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

This sounds like that would be the most logical course of action at this point. LasVegasGirl93 (talk) 15:23, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

The page for The Mirage is so detailed and may I add well composed, that it should be separate from the Hard Rock Las Vegas. A new page for the Hard Rock should be created. Perhaps a year to a year and a half prior to it’s scheduled opening. --NevadaExpert (talk) 21:13, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

New page for Volcano?

Since the Mirage is closed, do we need a separate page on the Volcano attraction or do we just need to keep it a section in the Mirage article? 50,000 people visited it a day and it ran for over 30 years. The Bellagio Fountains have a separate article so that's why I was wondering if the Volcano needed one too. MiamiMogul (talk) 22:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I would have no objection to that. In fact I would favor it because like the Bellagio Fountains, the Mirage Volcano has historic significance and has been a notable landmark. LasVegasGirl93 (talk) 12:37, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I agree, this attraction is significant in Las Vegas as well as in popular culture. The volcano is a great show and needs its own article especially now that it's gone. MiamiMogul (talk) 14:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

The difference between the two is that there's far more info about the Bellagio fountains. I don't think the volcano warrants a page of its own, as it's easily covered in this article. The Mirage being closed makes no difference.  AJFU  (talk) 14:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Not even if that section was moved to a separate article? MiamiMogul (talk) 14:19, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Can you please clarify? Because I don't see how it being closed suddenly changes anything. That section is no bigger now than it was before, and I'm not sure a few paragraphs is enough to justify a separate article. I could understand if there was more noteworthy information out there, but I think the Mirage article currently covers pretty much all there is to say about it.  AJFU  (talk) 16:45, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I was just wondering that since it has been receiving more attention lately and some would argue that it is equally as popular as the Bellagio Fountains, that it needs its own article. Being closed has nothing to do with it, just the fact that it has been increasingly popular over the past year. MiamiMogul (talk) 16:50, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I definitely think so as well. The Volcano is often the crown jewel feature at the Mirage, both during and after its closure. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 14:58, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. This historical significance of the volcano has been monumental. LasVegasGirl93 (talk) 23:03, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback, I am going to start working on an article tonight. MiamiMogul (talk) 23:29, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Go right ahead. I will back you on this. However, others may be opposed to it and may try to delete it. But as someone who lives in Las Vegas I can certainly agree with you in the appreciation of the historic nature of this landmark. It will be worth noting how many people and preservationists have been outraged by the decision to demolish it. LasVegasGirl93 (talk) 23:20, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your support. MiamiMogul (talk) 02:26, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

I created it: Mirage Volcano. Please let me know what you think and feel free to make any corrections/ adjustments. MiamiMogul (talk) 04:47, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

I can see that the page for the Mirage volcano was redirected. Looking at the section for the volcano on the mirage page, it seems detailed enough and does what it needs to do. I’m not so sure that a separate page is needed. However, there is a page for Fountains of Bellagio, so I can see why some may feel that a page for The Mirage volcano may be necessary. Being a Nevada resident myself, myself and many others feel that the Bellagio fountains have historically been seen as the bigger and more notable attraction. Tourists have enjoyed both attractions, but the Bellagio fountains certainly have greater notoriety. --NevadaExpert (talk) 21:18, 18 December 2024 (UTC)