Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chicago/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 ← Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 → Archive 9

Welcome

Welcome to WikiProject Chicago! This page was at one time focused on improving the Chicago article. Some Wikipedians have adopted this as a project to better organize information in articles related to the city of Chicago in the U.S. state of Illinois. Please feel free to post any suggestions or concerns here. For a list of this project's main objectives, see the Main Page. New members, please add your name to the Members list. TonyTheTiger 19:22, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Project name

This project covers articles related to both Chicago and the Chicago metropolitan area. Chicago is within the Chicago metropolitan area, but the name WikiProject Chicago implies that the project covers only articles related to Chicago proper. I personally live within the Chicago metropolitan area, and I am interested in articles related to the Chicago metropolitan area; but I also live about an hour away from Chicago proper. I feel that the name could be more accurate, and I propose that the name be changed to WikiProject Chicago Metro or something similar. Squideshi (talk) 04:59, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Renaming is unnecessary. No other city does so.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:31, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Argumentum ad populum. Also, I think you're illustrating my very point here--you said no other CITY does so. Is this project about the city or the metropolitan area? It it is about both, then why not use the term that includes both, rather than the one that excludes the other? As a resident of the metropolitan area, not the city proper, I feel somewhat second class here. Squideshi (talk) 18:11, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
I have posted a general proposal regarding this naming convention issue elsewhere and would welcome your feedback. Please see that conversation here. Squideshi (talk) 22:35, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Jay Pritzker Pavilion/archive1

Feel free to comment at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Jay Pritzker Pavilion/archive1.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:55, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:06, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

GA reassessment of Washington Park (Chicago park)

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the aticle which you can see at Talk:Washington Park (Chicago park)/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:55, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

WP:CHIFTD a success

Jay Pritzker Pavilion is now a WP:FA. This means that Millennium Park has enough featured articles for promotion from WP:GT to WP:FT, which should occur shortly. Effective September 1 (with a six month grace period) the standard will raise from 1/3 to 1/2 of the articles needing to be featured to maintain an FT rating. We will need to improve three more articles by March 1, 2011 in order to retain the FT status once it is officially conferred.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:21, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Apparently the grace period does not apply according to Wikipedia_talk:Featured_topic_questions#Millennium_Park_GT_to_FT.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:21, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Any one in the Chicago area want to grab a picture for me?

Can someone please get me a picture of the Burger King located at 506 South Washington Street in Naperville? It is one of the oldest, original BK locations in the country still standing and I need a picture of it for the History of Burger King article.

All help is of course greatly appreciated,

--Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 21:22, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Timothy Blackstone GA Sweeps: On Hold

I have reviewed Timothy Blackstone for GA Sweeps to determine if it still qualifies as a Good Article. In reviewing the article I have found several issues, which I have detailed here. Since the article falls under the scope of this project, I figured you would be interested in contributing to further improve the article. Please comment there to help the article maintain its GA status. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:01, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Church name formatting

When I came upon St. Stanislaus Kostka in Chicago, I figured that that name must be wrong, since the only format of disambiguating churches I have seen is in the form of St. Stanislaus Kostka Church (Chicago, Illinois) (two other "St. Stanislaus Kostka"s were in this form). So, I moved the article.

However, I just now noticed that a number of Chicago churches (and perhaps elsewhere) use the "in Chicago" form (such as St. Wenceslaus in Chicago and St. John Cantius in Chicago). Does anybody know if there is a specific guideline with respect to churches that should be followed? I am of the opinion that "<Church Name> Church (<City>, <State>)" is preferable as I'm pretty sure it has wider usage, but I'd like to get some outside input before making major changes (as well as some help moving the others, depending on the outcome). Cheers, -M.Nelson (talk) 05:06, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

GA reassessment of Chicago Midway International Airport

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the referencing which you can see at Talk:Chicago Midway International Airport/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:18, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

GA reassessment of Illinois's 3rd congressional district

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. You are being notified as this project's banner is on the talk page. I have found some concerns which you can see at Talk:Illinois's 3rd congressional district/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:14, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Signpost

Hello, WikiProject Chicago members. I am on the Signpost's WikiProject report desk, and I was wondering:

  • 1)Has the project ever been featured in the Wikipedia Signpost?
  • 2)If not, who are the most active members or coordinators (if you have [a] coordinator[s])?
    • I am the most active. Many others contribute. As a small geographic project, many interact with as at the cross-section of our topics. E.G., Doncram helps us with Historically designated properties. Raime helps us with tall buildings. Ruhrfisch has helped us attain our first WP:FT. As for regular members, people like Zagalejo, JeremyA, Kevin Forsyth, Torsodog are among the many who help the project out in different ways. Torsodog has started making many FLs and GAs as a nominator. He frequently is listed at WP:CHIAA in these areas. He and I are the current members who are most productive in creating reviewed content.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:30, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Belugaboy Talk to Me! 22:01, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/McCormick Tribune Plaza & Ice Rink/archive1

WP:CHIFTD will need to get 3 more FAs by September 1 in order to retain its WP:FT status. Feel free to come comment at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/McCormick Tribune Plaza & Ice Rink/archive1.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 08:50, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Chicago Bears FAR

I have nominated Chicago Bears for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 20:40, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Park Grill AFD

Please come comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Park Grill.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:11, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

This closed as keep. The Park Grill article has changed beyond all recognition since the AFD debate began. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 14:39, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Chicago 3.1

Please sign up for Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Chicago 3.1.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:07, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Cake Girls

I added a note to Cake Girls about the fire this morning. If anyone can help fix that up, please do so. :) BOZ (talk) 15:09, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

University of Chicago Residence Halls

User:Namiba has nominated a large number of articles about college residence halls for deletion, including many covering University of Chicago dorms. The AfDs will close on Mar 31, so I am looking for volunteers to do some rapid research and/or article rescue work. The nominees are:

  • 40 Burton–Judson Courts
  • 41 Maclean Hall
  • 43 Broadview Hall
  • 44 Breckinridge Hall
  • 46 Blackstone Hall
  • 48 Max Palevsky Residential Commons
  • 49 Pierce Tower
  • 51 Stony Island Hall
  • 52 South Campus Residence Hall

Thank you in advance for your help. Racepacket (talk) 16:26, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I think a fair case could at least be made for Burton-Judson Courts. It's included in the AIA Guide, and gets more extensive coverage in at least a couple other books. I've commented at that discussion. Zagalejo^^^ 03:25, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Pierce Tower is (or was) the largest concrete building in the world with no rebar, or so I've been told. Speciate (talk) 04:54, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Jay Pritzker Pavilion

TFA! Go Chicago! :) BOZ (talk) 00:16, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Need help on Northwestern quarterbacks template

Could someone help me out filling in the missing starting quarterbacks for Template:NUQuarterback? I have the quarterbacks from now to 1996 and a few before 1996, but I need some help. Thanks, Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:31, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Notable enough?

I have an ancestor whose murder resulted in a full-page account in the Tribune in 1897. In the same year I think, a few paragraphs in a who's-who of Chicago businessmen were devoted to him. If those are enough to establish notability, I have details from the census and other records which I can use to flesh it out. Let me know your opinion(s). BOZ (talk) 00:09, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

If your ancestor only received media coverage due to his death, he is not notable enough. However, if he received coverage for being a successful businessman, he may be notable enough if there are enough sources. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:12, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Oh yeah, I did ask about this a while ago. I just found this online as well, pretty cool.
The story of the murder had a lot of details on his business activities (there's a link to the clipping above somewhere). BOZ (talk) 00:23, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Oh yeah, not sure what this is, but might be useful? BOZ (talk) 00:27, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Homicide report? BOZ (talk) 00:31, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Even if this doesn't pass notability guidelines (probably on the border right now), it's still some pretty interesting stuff. None of my ancestors, as far as I know, have been published in books or news articles, so if you aren't able to create an article, it's still something to tell your children, grandchildren, etc. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:37, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
He's the only ancestor of mine (as far as I know) that's even remotely newsworthy in this sort of way. :) A few more odd bits: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] BOZ (talk) 00:39, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm not an expert on what's notable and non-notable for this subject matter, and since this talk page is hardly watched, I would suggest that you ask around at Wikipedia:Notability/Noticeboard. You could always create the article in userspace and move it to mainspace, with the risk that the page could be deleted. Sorry for the lack of real help, and good luck on making this an article. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:44, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Not a bad idea, perhaps; I'll try both. Found a bunch of possible mentions (but I can't read anything in Google News): [6] I might just create it for my own amusement in my userspace, and I think I will ask around at the notability noticeboard. BOZ (talk) 00:56, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Diane Wood

At Diane Wood, part of this project, a discussion is occurring as to the of necessity of including 13 references in the lead for the proposition that a person has been mentioned as a potential nominee for the Supreme Court. -Rrius (talk) 01:04, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

FLRC of Smoking Popes discography

I have nominated Smoking Popes discography for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. --IllaZilla (talk) 03:20, 19 April 2010 (UTC)


Template:Location map United States Chicago

Hi I've made a new map of Chicago for pin. See Hyatt Regency Chicago for it in use. I'm currently sorting out the pushpin option for infobox skyscraper so hopefully soon many landmarks of Chicago wilol have city locator maps. If you would like a smaller scale map focusing on a particular part of Chicago like downtown etc please let me know and I'll be happy to upload some for you. Please help add this map to articles. Dr. Blofeld White cat 18:57, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Update! Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs) has created the following:
Template:Location map United States Chicago Greater (E.g., Gerald Ratner Athletics Center}
Template:Location map United States Chicago (E.g., Petrillo Music Shell)
Template:Location map United States Chicago Central (E.g., Harris Theater (Chicago, Illinois))
Template:Location map United States Chicago Loop. (E.g., Merle Reskin Theatre)
Template:Location map United States Chicago Near North Side (E.g., Museum of Contemporary Art, Chicago)
Template:Location map United States Chicago Downtown (E.g., Hyatt Regency Chicago)

Current operational templates: Template:Infobox building, Template:Infobox stadium, Template:Infobox hotel, Template:Infobox casino, Template:Infobox museum, Template:Infobox theatre.

See examples used at Gerald Ratner Athletics Center, Hyatt Regency Chicago, Harris Theater and McDonald's Cycle Center.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:17, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Discussion moved from my user page.

What is this about? Was there a discussion about this anywhere before it was implemented? I don't think added maps to all of these articles' infoboxes in needed at all. Coordinates are provided in all these articles and in the MP articles, another map is already provided. This is overkill. --TorsodogTalk 16:57, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Strongly disagree with you Torsodog. A map showing locator in Chicago is nothing like the model type map of Millenium Park. A lot of people would find that a locator within Chicago is easier to see where it is. The model map is good for understanding Millenium Park but gives no indication of where it is within Chicago and relation to surrounding area not to mention it is on its side which is not apparently obvious to the casual reader. I think the pin map is much clearer for understanding location. That is pretty important in my view. Overkill it most certainly is not. Have you ever read WP:OWN? Dr. Blofeld White cat 17:03, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

This is not an WP:OWN issue. It is a matter of figuring out what is useful. He is just questioning its usefulness. My opinion is that at some scale a geographical depiction is useful for the reader to understand where the feature is. It is not clear to me which scale (now that we have 5) is most useful to the reader in which situations.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:08, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for clearing up the WP:OWN accusation, Tony. Dr, please assume good faith. I believe the maps to be redundant considering the coordinates at the top of the article. The second-most prominent image in an article should not be a map of the loop when the information is already linked at the top of the article, IMO. I would like to bring this discussion to an even bigger forum, if we could. This could apply to a lot more articles than just Chicago-related ones. I really don't know where to start it though. Any ideas? --TorsodogTalk 17:14, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah you have a point about the Chicago loop map. Well use Template:Location map United States Chicago Central or even Template:Location map Chicago then if you wish. I certainly do not see a city locator map as redundant when all we have is a side view of a model of Millennium Park with no understanding of where it actually is. Perhaps the wider Chicago map would be better then for the Millennium Park articles. Up to you. But also assume good faith on my part and that I've made you maps to help your project. Sometimes the word "thanks" would go a long way... Dr. Blofeld White cat 17:17, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

What about my comments regarding the redundancy of the map and the coordinates? I just think that with all the maps in these articles, it seems that too much emphasis is being put on the locations of these buildings/sculptures/etc. If the reader is interested in where they are located, they can click on the coords. That is what they are there for, after all. And please don't get defensive. I never attacked you or didn't assume good faith. I just wanted to stop you quickly before you added any more maps so you didn't potentially do more work than you needed to. --TorsodogTalk 17:24, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
This is an encyclopedia and one of the most important things for the reader is the location of the feature. I know when I am view municipalities, I am now disappointed in any municipal area that does not have good maps in its infobox. It would be nice if buildings became the same way for the reader, IMO.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:28, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I completely understand that and agree. I just think that the coordinates provide that already for the reader in a better way, given that they can change the scale themselves. --TorsodogTalk 17:32, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah that's the way I feel about it too and is why I do so much work with mapping development on wikipedia as I see it very important encyclopedia to have a concept of where it is. I do like the model map of Millennium Park which is ideal for studying the park but if you think internationally then it has little context to the rest of Chicago which is why I think it is much needed. None of the articles before thes emaps were made give the reader any indicaitons mapwise of where in the city it is. I agree the Loop maps were probably a little redundant as they are too similar in scale but the Chicago Central wouldn't be. There shouldn't be any problems with me adding maps to the others outside this park though which have no maps at all. I'll let you decide what you want to do about MP. Dr. Blofeld White cat 17:35, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Is there a reason you aren't addressing my issue of the redundancy between the maps and the coordinates template, as that is my main contention. Also, considering these maps integration into many infoboxes, mind if we take this discussion to the village pump or something (or something more appropriate? I don't often start discussions like this) --TorsodogTalk 17:38, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I personally don't find the coordinates to be any more redundant with a map in a building/structure article than they are in a municipality map where I want to know what part of a state a city is in by looking at a map.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:41, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I really like maps and I like the series of locator maps Dr. Blofeld has made - thanks again! At the same time, I am fairly familiar with Chicago (though I have not been there for several years, alas), so I look at those maps and they are clear to me. However, I am not sure how useful they are to the average reader. A slight digression - when I lived in Europe I kept a small map of the United States in my pocket as I found that many people (even those who were well educated and interested in the US) had only a very vague knowledge of the location of most of the states. I am guessing the average reader of Wikipedia would have a some difficulty putting a dot on the exact location of Chicago on a world or US map. If that is the case (and I could be wrong), then I am not sure how useful a map of the Metro area or Loop is. The French Wikipedia has a really cool feature where you can toggle back and forth between a map of the country and of the state - see fr:Parc d'État de Black Moshannon for an example. IF we could od something like that, I think that would be really cool. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 17:47, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Ruhrfisch. Mmm, I certinaly don't think maps are redundant to coordinates. Coordinates don't visualize on an encyclopedia page where it is. From my viewpoint it helps my brain to gain an understanding of location without having to look at external maps. I completely agree with Ruhr, the Loop map is difficult to understand where it is without alrger scale maps to support it. The multiple map option I've actually proposed a while back to give people the option to display maps in various scales depnding on their preferences. However, nothing as been updated yet. The ideal would be the clickable mapping option which can show say Cloud Gate within Chicago and then the otopn to click it and zoom in on Loop area. The idea though about localised maps is that they are there to support what can be seen in wiki atlas. People can see where Chicago is by zooming out of wiki atlas. But from my personal viewpoint I find a solid map a good way to understand specific location if it can be put in ocontext (which it can by clicking the wiki globe). Dr. Blofeld White cat 17:53, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I think I agree with Ruhr, mostly. For example, someone from out of town will have much less need for an exact map of where Cloud Gate is than I would. I'd also like to say that even though I've lived in Chicago all my life, those tiny thumbnail maps are not very useful until I click on the image to see the original sized version... something I could just do with the coordinate template. So why offer these tiny images at all? An encyclopedia isn't an atlas, but it sure can direct readers directly to an atlas, which is what the coord template does. --TorsodogTalk 17:57, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I started a discussion about the issue here. Hopefully that's an appropriate forum for this? If not, I apologize! --TorsodogTalk 18:11, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I have added that discussion to Template:Cent.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:33, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Good luck with that. I doubt you'll get more than one or two people commenting on it. As for the localised maps, I believe i've addressed this issue with a city sector locator in the corner -see Merle Reskin Theatre. The question is whether or not the article is imporved having this map or whether or not it is actually better off without it. Dr. Blofeld White cat 18:49, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Not to be a pain in the ass, but honestly, that entire map image is almost completely illegible in thumbnail size. I've from the city and it is still very hard to read. Anyone unfamiliar with with Chicago will have no idea what is going on in that picture. To answer your question though, I don't think the smaller map of Chicago helps all that much. It actually took me a minute to realize it was there. --TorsodogTalk 18:56, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I agree that the small locator map is not helpful.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:21, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
The infobox location maps are not only unhelpful, but actively destructive. They rob valuable screen space away from actual information at the top of the article. The coordinates link to a map just fine. --Knulclunk (talk) 23:23, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons

The WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons (UBLPs) aims to reduce the number of unreferenced biographical articles to under 30,000 by June 1, primarily by enabling WikiProjects to easily identify UBLP articles in their project's scope. There were over 52,000 unreferenced BLPs in January 2010 and this has been reduced to 35,715 as of May 1. A bot is now running daily to compile a list of all articles that are in both Category:All unreferenced BLPs and have been tagged by a WikiProject. Note that the bot does NOT place unreferenced tags or assign articles to projects - this has been done by others previously - it just compiles a list.

Your Project's list can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Unreferenced BLPs. Currently you have approximately 414 articles to be referenced. Other project lists can be found at User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects/Templates and User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects.

Your assistance in reviewing and referencing these articles is greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, please don't hestitate to ask either at WT:URBLP or at my talk page. Thanks, The-Pope (talk) 16:48, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Free images

Zol87 (talk · contribs) has taken images throughout cook county and put them in sets based on neighborhoods at www.flickr.com. Feel free to incorporate these into articles. See http://www.flickr.com/photos/zol87/sets/. They probably should be added to the Community areas of Chicago articles by an industrious WPian.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:27, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Wow! Very comprehensive. Nice work, Zol87! Zagalejo^^^ 17:30, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Template:Chicago portal

FYI, {{Chicago portal}} has been nominated for deletion. 70.29.210.155 (talk) 05:21, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Now replaced by {{portal|Chicago}}. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:36, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Chicago bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics

Chicago bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics is part of the topic Bids for the 2016 Summer Olympics, which is an excellent candidate to the Featured topic status. I wonder if there are editors interested in turning the Chicago's article into a Featured one. Best regards; Felipe Menegaz 23:13, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

And here I was hoping we could just forget about the whole thing! -Rrius (talk) 23:18, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Ha ha ha ha! Felipe Menegaz 23:51, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Blackhawks Parade in Chicago

Is there an article or section somewhere regarding the parade in Chicago yesterday? My understanding is that the turnout was substantial (~2million). Perhaps someone could get some free images of the parade on flickr, or somewhere else? Thanks in advance for the help! ---kilbad (talk) 15:40, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

  • I don't know where you want to put the images, but here are some properly licensed ones
http://www.flickr.com/photos/swanksalot/4690931257/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/blipsman/4690643357/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/swanksalot/4690928435/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/vxla/4691247287/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/derek-and-edith/4696242165/

Here are some others that you will have to make licensing requests for

http://www.flickr.com/photos/phule/4690762585/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nicksuydam/4691438312/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/87996767@N00/4691230319/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/markusbereflod/4691557288/

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:24, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Streets articles and infoboxes

A fairly substantial update was made to {{infobox road}}, and Chicago street articles are popping up in Category:Infobox road transclusions with deprecated parameters. In summary, the previous parameters: direction, length, and cities have been deprecated. Each terminus should be specified with direction_a/terminus_a and direction_b/terminus_b. Length should be specified with length_mi and the km figure will be inserted automatically. The parameter cities has been deprecated for the US totally, but counties are fine. Lastly, the establishment date takes just a date. If there isn't a decommission date, the infobox appends "– present" after the date. The parameter history can be used where more history is desired. Imzadi 1979 → 04:00, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Millennium Park/archive1‎

Please follow along at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Millennium Park/archive1‎.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:58, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Shimer College a Featured Article Candidate

The Chicago article Shimer College is currently a Featured Article candidate. The review may be of interest to folks on the project. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 18:08, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect number

East Side, Chicago (I think) is incorrectly numbered 51, there is two 51s File:US-IL-Chicago-CA46.GIF CTJF83 chat 21:34, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

It apparently only affects some maps File:US-IL-Chicago-CA03.png CTJF83 chat 21:42, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I made us a Wikipedia ad.

Wikipedia ad for Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago
Wikipedia adsfile info – #219

Do {{wikipedia ads|ad=219}} for those who want to add it to their user pages. elektrikSHOOS 19:19, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Millennium Park/archive3

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Millennium Park/archive3 is in need of further feedback.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:38, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Large-ish identification job: Dori's pictures on Commons

I assume this is the sort of thing WikiProject Chicago is interested in: About 5 years ago, User:Dori (via an upload bot) uploaded lots and lots of pictures of downtown-ish Chicago from November 2004 to Commons. They start around here on his contribution list. Nobody seems to have touched many of them since then. They need a few fixes:

  • Dori says they're really November 2004, like the camera EXIF info says, but are all mislabeled 2005, both in the description and filename. (He confirmed 2004 when I asked him on his talk page.)
  • 90% of them need to be identified and categorized by location, and/or added to Commons:Category:Unidentified pictures of Chicago so someone else will notice them. (Some of them from skyscrapers are already categorized by what tower they are photographed from, but not what is in the photo.)
  • They need {{Information}} to replace the weird description they have right now.

I've done some of them, but it turns out this is probably going to be more work than just one person can tear through manually, and I'm not using any automated scripts, and I'm not from Chicago so a lot of buildings I have to go play hide-and-seek with on Google Earth. This looks like a job for this project instead. I think a well-placed replacement script could rewrite the (pretty much identical) descriptions for all the files that haven't yet been edited, and/or place {{rename}} tags on them. However, before any renames, it's probably best to let people identify and describe as many as possible and put rename tags on them based on that instead. Have fun! --Closeapple (talk) 06:59, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Old St. Patrick's Church (Chicago, Illinois)

We don't seem to have any decent photos of the detail of the Celtic Revival interior decorations of this church by Thomas A. O'Shaughnessy, which would be very welcome - detailed shots of the glass, plasterwork and altar surround rather than wide interior shots. Johnbod (talk) 20:43, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Chicago articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Chicago articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 22:14, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard discussion regarding Penny Pritzker article(s)

FYI, see:

Penny Pritzker was an important backer of the Obama campaign and is a major player in the Chicago business community. The edits of concern involve subtle issues and it would be good to get additional eyes on the subject.
--A. B. (talk • contribs) 12:59, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Werner Erhard vs. Columbia Broadcasting System for deletion

A discussion has begun about whether the article Werner Erhard vs. Columbia Broadcasting System, which is relevant to the subject of this WikiProject, should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Werner Erhard vs. Columbia Broadcasting System until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 18:01, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Communities considered to be apart of the North Shore area

I would appreciate if you could share your knowledge and express your opinion on this matter. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 00:57, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Monadnock Building at FAC

The Chicago article Monadnock Building is now a Featured Article candidate. People on this project may be interested in the review. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 21:40, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ten

Does anyone have any ideas for Wikipedia Ten?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:55, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

A consideration for cross project consolidation of talk page templates

I have started a conversation here about the possibility of combining some of the United States related WikiProject Banners into {{WikiProject United States}}. If you have any comments, questions or suggestions please take a moment and let me know. --Kumioko (talk) 19:43, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Lincoln Park mess

A series of recent moves has resulted in the following article titles:

Of course, the comma needs to go, but the titles themselves need to be fixed as well. Per WP:PRECISION, over-precision should be avoided. I was considering moving (or requesting to move) to create the following article titles

What do you think? Or should Lincoln Park (Chicago) be the neighborhood? --JaGatalk 16:48, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

I believe according to current conventions the articles are suppose to be at Lincoln Park (Chicago park) and Lincoln Park, Chicago. The latter is the current convention for all the Community areas of Chicago. The former is how parks are named for some reason. Washington Park (Chicago park), Garfield Park (Chicago park), Jefferson Park (Chicago park) and Douglas Park (Chicago park) are examples. I do not understand the logic of this dabbing. Many Chicago parks are not dabbed in the same way. For example, Washington Square Park (Chicago) and Burnham Park (Chicago) are not dabbed the according to current conventions. Take a look at Category:Parks in Chicago, Illinois.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:06, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Ya, some sort of park naming convension needs to be established. I don't see a point of having park again "(Chicago Park)", when park is in the article title before that, so I think it should just say Washington Park (Chicago) CTJF83 chat 17:22, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Well then we have disambig issues I see. CTJF83 chat 17:23, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
If I remember correctly, before the moves we had Lincoln Park, Chicago (the neighborhood) and Lincoln Park (Chicago) (the park). I suppose the person/people responsible for the moves thought that that was confusing. I think Tony's suggestion would be the simplest. —Jeremy (talk) 17:25, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
I just don't like the 2 "park"s. Not living in Chicago, I can't answer this question...but if someone says Lincoln Park, do you think of the neighborhood first or the park? Perhaps that can put some weight on which way we go with? CTJF83 chat 17:28, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Unless the context was clear I would ask which one they were referring to. The neighborhood should definitely be at Lincoln Park, Chicago as that is pretty much the standard DAB for US neighborhoods. I'm open to other suggestions for the park. —Jeremy (talk) 17:35, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
As a further complication, I notice that currently Lincoln Park is a redirect to the Chicago park rather than a DAB page. If that is accepted as a redirect then the Chicago park should just be at that page.—Jeremy (talk) 17:38, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
(ec) Can you fix the fact that your above link redirects to Lincoln Park, (Chicago neighborhood)? I think we all agree that needs to be fixed. CTJF83 chat 17:40, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
OK, done. I think for the park, perhaps getting wider community input by doing a formal RM might be the best thing.—Jeremy (talk) 17:51, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Agree, is Lincoln Park (Chicago) too confusing for the park? CTJF83 chat 17:57, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't know. I think that we should do an RM for Lincoln Park (Chicago park) -> Lincoln Park on the basis that this would just reverse the direction of that particular redirect. If Lincoln Park (Chicago park) is considered the main article for [[Lincoln Park]] then it should be at that title, otherwise the DAB page should be at [[Lincoln Park]] and we can suggest [[Lincoln Park (Chicago)]] as the preferred second choice. —Jeremy (talk) 18:06, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Ok, makes sense. CTJF83 chat 18:24, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
I started a RM at Talk:Lincoln_Park_(Chicago_park) —Jeremy (talk) 18:46, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Chicago/Archive_5&oldid=1140165045"