Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chicago

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is supported by WikiProject Cities, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to cities, towns, and various other settlements on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
NA This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the quality scale.


Contents
Shortcuts:
WT:WPChi
WT:CHICAGO
Archive
Archives
1 - July 2005-December 2006
2 - 2007


Welcome to WikiProject Chicago! This page was at one time focussed 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)

[edit] Wicked

I just removed the project tag from Wicked (musical). If pages for musicals were tagged with every city WikiProject in which the musical ran, it would take up the entire talk page! —  MusicMaker5376 16:51, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I've again removed the tag from the article, and I would appreciate it if it weren't replaced. The two WikiProjects which claim the article -- WikiProject Musical Theatre and WikiProject Oz -- have a far greater understanding of the subject and complexities than would a WikiProject dedicated to a city in which it has played. —  MusicMaker5376 00:21, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WLS-TV

I'd appreciate others from Chicago commenting on the WLS-TV discussion re: the "minivan incident". Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 15:21, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank for calling this to our attention.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 19:45, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Adam Siczek

My great-grandfather Adam SICZEK came in 1913 from Poland to Chicago. He was carpenter and died on 10th January 1932 in Bremen Township, Cook County, Illinois. I found his name in Illinois Statewide Death Index: [1]. Can somebody help me? I search for his grave, and I don't know what I have to do :( Please help me! Where could be his grave? My email: rks@interia.pl . I'll be grateful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.242.236.249 (talk) 20:38, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Is he a notable person that should be listed on notable grave websites?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 19:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
No, he wasn't any notable person. 77.242.236.249 (talk) 23:25, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
I apologize, but I am not sure how to help.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 17:18, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Get in contact with someone at the Newberry Library (I'd actually recommend just taking a trip there). Among its many qualities, it's virtually the best genealogical research facility in Chicago. Good luck in your search. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 07:40, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RfC: Mirth & Girth and importance to Harold Washington

Hey everyone... I'm requesting comments on Talk:Harold Washington#RfC: How much importance should be placed on Mirth & Girth in Harold Washington? regarding Mirth & Girth. Your input is appreciated. Thanks! —Rob (talk) 21:54, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I think it is adequately noted in the article and I think the see also is excessive since it is wikilinked inline.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 19:24, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Chicago Fashion Week

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Chicago Fashion Week, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Chicago Fashion Week. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:32, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I nominated this because there is no national coverage of this event and it does not appear to be a notable fashion week.Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:32, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Looking at the date and the redlink it must have gotten WP:CSDed. You probably made a good decision.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 19:21, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hillary Clinton at WP:GAR

Hillary Clinton has been at WP:GAR since Feb. 11.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 06:22, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New template

Hi, I created {{Chicago skyline}} for use in the articles of all the building in the image. Some the buildings have new names and if someone that knows how cold update the picture, that'd be great. Also, I think 2 of the building still need articles (but are linked anyway). John Reaves 05:32, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Holy Cow!! I did not notice it was clickable at first. Great job. That should be nominated at WP:FPC.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 01:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Side note - eclipse

Take a break, Chi-folk. Go outside. Look over the lake. Full lunar eclipse happening as I write this. If you look closely, you can even see where they faked the Mars landing (lol). - Arcayne (cast a spell) 02:05, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I did not hear about it until about 3:30 by which time it was over. Furthermore, the guy who told me about it sounded like he was making something up to impress a babe in attendance, so I did not really pay attention until I looked up lunar eclipse the next day.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 01:46, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] History of the Chicago Cubs

Anyone read or seen this article? No citations whatsoever, reads like a Year in Review by the Trib, and is ridiculously un-wiki like. Seeing how important the Cubs are to Chicago (and this project I'd assume), I thought someone might want to check it out. 76.223.30.228 (talk) 07:49, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Have you read any of the other team histories for comparison? Since you only zoomed in on this one and have edited nothing else, I assumed you were a Cardinals fan. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 07:55, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
No actually I'm not. Just happened to come across it. Anyway, what difference does it make what team I follow? The article is about as non-compliant with wikipedia policy as anything I've seen on here, and you are defending it? Just because other people do it, doesn't mean a hill of beans. Read and study WP:NOT and then tell me what I've stated above is wrong. You may not like it, but you cannot deny it's completely uncited, and written in a POV fan-blog like tone. Sorry to be the one to have to break the news to you. 76.223.30.228 (talk) 08:15, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm not necessarily defending it, I'm just trying to figure out why you're singling it out. I'm sure there's room for improvement, but most of it is factual. I don't think a team's "press release" would be bragging about how lousy the team has been for 100 years, do you? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 08:39, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Nothing to figure out at all. Like I said, I just happened to come across it and was a bit curious as to how such an article can be written without sourcing anything. Facts or not -- and I honestly couldn't care less about the bragging or 'unbragging' so much as it doesn't conform to what I expect -- it needs to be cited. Besides that, wiki articles are to conform to an encyclopedic style, not read like a Jay Mariotti column. I've since gone back and looked at some of the others, and yes, they are substandard as well. I've mentioned it on the wiki Project Basbeball page as well, since you pointed out that all of them are like that. 76.223.30.228 (talk) 08:55, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Sources, such as they are, were not copied from the main page. That's one problem. Another is that the sources given are insufficient to cover it. No question it needs to be better-sourced. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 09:47, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
I think every MLB team is suppose to have one. See Template:Chicago_Cubs, Template:New_York_Yankees, Template:San_Francisco_Giants. Unfortunately, my Template:Los Angeles Dodgers haven't caught on yet. The article needs sourcing though.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 01:54, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Time has come for FA Consideration

Okay, it's been a slog, and there is still some tinkering to be done, but I belirve it's nearing the point where the Chicago article should get consideration for nomination to FA status. I'd say that it's ready to be re-awarded its 'good' status at least. There is some work still to be done, and I am asking that everyone here aims to maintain the integrity of the article so that it meets FA standards. Of course, this should be the aim of every editor of every article, but in this case, it's the city article -- the definitive source article for the WikiProject Chicago itself. We like to think of our city as world class and all that. But as an entity on Wikipedia, it's not even up to par with Providence, Rhode Island! The city's flag has four stars: one for the Ft. Dearborn Massacre, one for the fire, one for the World's Colombian Exposition and one for the Century of Progress. Let's get the city a fifth star -- the one that comes with FA status. (sorry to sound like a cheerleader, but I'm sitting here every night policing ad editing and citing the damn thing, and I want it to all be for something more than an outlet for my own boredom!) Ryecatcher773 (talk) 06:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I just opened up peer group city GAs Washington, D.C., Miami, Florida, Manhattan, Los Angeles, California, and Toronto. Immediately, I see our WP:LEAD is weak compared to the other articles. This caused me to do an auto peer review (also posted at Talk:Chicago). Note the first thing the auto peer review mentioned is the short lead. I am willing to help pursue a WP:GA. However, we should first make our article as good as the GAs of comparable municipalities.

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

  • Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
  • Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.[?]
  • Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 000 feet , use 000 feet , which when you are editing the page, should look like: 000 feet .[?]
  • When writing standard abbreviations, the abbreviations should not have a 's' to demark plurality (for example, change kms to km and lbs to lb).
  • Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, if January 15, 2006 appeared in the article, link it as January 15, 2006.[?]
  • Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) may be too long – consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per Wikipedia:Summary style.[?]
  • Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
    • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
  • The script has spotted the following contractions: didn't, Don't, if these are outside of quotations, they should be expanded.
  • As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2][?]
  • Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 14:31, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Upon further inspection, both Miami and Washington should be GARed and LA is pretty borderline. I am going to GAR Miami and Washington. We should strive toward Toronto and Manhattan.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 14:55, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

P.S. My list above was WP:GAs. All current large United States cities (Boston, Massachusetts, Cleveland, Ohio, Minneapolis, Minnesota, New York City, San Francisco, California, and Detroit, Michigan) seem to continue to be FA quality although Detroit may be the weakest of the group.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 15:33, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed renaming of Chicago-related categories

There is a proposal to move all 'X in Chicago' categories to 'X in Chicago, Illinois'. Anyone with strong views on this move should read the discussion here. —Jeremy (talk) 20:34, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I saw these and I believe I voted, but I forgot to post at WP:CHIDISCUSS where these should be noted.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 02:00, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] ChicagoWikiProject: Articles of unclear notability

Hello,

there are currently 73 articles in the scope of this project which are tagged with notability concerns. I have listed them here. (Note: this listing is based on a database snapshot of 12 March 2008 and may be slightly outdated.)

I would encourage members of this project to have a look at these articles, and see whether independent sources can be added, whether the articles can be merged into an article of larger scope, or possibly be deleted. Any help in cleaning up this backlog is appreciated. For further information, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Notability.

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the Notability project page or on my personal talk page. (I'm not watching this page however.) Thanks! --B. Wolterding (talk) 15:02, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Northerly Island

Currently Northerly Island is a part of the article on Meig's Field. This made sense at one point, but since Meig's is gone it's a bit anachronistic. Additionally, Northerly Island is the site of Solidarity Drive with its beautiful monuments and the Adler Planetarium. Any opinions on how we should rearrange this?--Orestek (talk) 01:37, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I would suggest creating a Northerly Island Article. Then, use {{mainarticle}} for sections on Adler, Meigs Field, 12th St. Beach and Charter One Pavilion.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 01:56, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Chicago

Under the subsection "Chicago Architecture" there are three articles mentioned as ones to see also in addition to two articles listed as main articles. I think we should get rid of some of these, it makes for two much clutter when we're looking for FA status. My proposal is to at the very least get rid of the links to Parks of Chicago, and Neighborhoods of Chicago in this subsection since they have their own subsections. I particularly dislike the link to the neighborhoods article since its the very next subsection--Orestek (talk) 20:41, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

It does seem like a bit much. We should compare the article to FA city articles (preferably large American ones). Only the first main belongs, but the second seems to belong in see also. However, Parks does not belong in see also. I have revised. Check now.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 03:57, 22 April 2008 (UTC)--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 03:57, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Chicago skyline

I just started working on the article The Buckingham, when I found this template. The building is very obviously displayed (quite prominently IMO), but the problem is it is not labeled. I was wondering how do I go about editing the image for the template or who do I ask to edit it for me? Thanks Torsodog (talk) 07:15, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Also, as I'm editing more articles relating to the area, Outer Drive East is much more dominating than the four small towers of 900 North Michigan, yet that is not labeled either. Torsodog (talk) 10:59, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

It seems like the original version of that image was created by User:Urban at Wikimedia Commons. You can try asking him for help. Zagalejo^^^ 16:48, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] McKinsey & Company

This one really needs some work on neutral tone, and its notability and placement in the bigger scheme of things. I removed the interview section. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Hopefully, an employee or someone in the industry can take this article over.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 04:04, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Chicagoland.png and Chicagoland municipality template

Some time ago, I replaced the geobox templates on West Chicago, Hinsdale, and Batavia with Template:Chicagoland municipality. One necessary element is an image (US-IL-Chicagoland-NAME) that shows the municipality within the 9-county metro area. The image is generated using this image, but I don't have the knowledge or software to work with the layers in order to do so. Would someone please generate the three images for inclusion in the articles? -Rrius (talk) 18:46, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

User:Kranar drogin was an ace with this stuff, but I don't know how active he has been lately.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 04:08, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Naming of Metra Articles

The titles of articles for the Metra lines with cardinal directions (e.g., North or East) in their names use a "slash" between the direction and the word preceding it. For example, the Union Pacific North line is rendered "Union Pacific/North". Why is this? The website doesn't print the line names that way. -Rrius (talk) 06:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Looking at {{Metra Lines}}, I see what you mean. I do not know what is correct. Talk with the active editors or contact WP:RR--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 04:42, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RfC: Mirth & Girth GAN and completeness of article

See Talk:Mirth & Girth#RFC for completeness of article. —Rob (talk) 17:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

You have gotten some good feedback on ways to improve the article from what I can see. Good luck.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:43, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RfC: Mirth & Girth and whether the part mentioning Chicago Tonight is WP:UNDUE

Please comment at Talk:Mirth & Girth. Thanks. —Rob (talk) 04:43, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Alexander Graham Bell School

Could I request someone with knowledge of Chicago schools keep half an eye on Alexander Graham Bell School? It's being massively edited by a single IP - from the mix of good-faith edits and vandalism, almost certainly a group of students using the school's computer for a project. In these circumstances given the number of good-faith edits, I really don't want to go the usual route for an IP who's vandalised repeatedly and block it, but obviously it needs to be watched to stop libel & inappropriateness slipping through... — iridescent 21:18, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

It sounds like you may want to try WP:RPP.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:23, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Is Michael Sneed a reliable source?

Sneed is a columnist for the Chicago Sun-Times. In one of the sources I've been reading (re Harold Washington), he's also been referred to as "the gossip columnist." Should he be cited at all? —Rob (talk) 02:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Michael Sneed is actually a woman: [2]. :) She's not an ideal source; she famously misidentified the gunman at the Virginia Tech massacre as a "Chinese national". [3]. It really depends on the specific sort of claim you need to cite, and how it's presented in the article. Zagalejo^^^ 03:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Chicago Daily News image collection at Chicago Historical Society

I have just discovered that the Library of Congress search engine at http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/index.html includes the Chicago Daily News image collection at Chicago Historical Society. For the majority of Chicago articles you put in the search box you will get many images. The collection is from 1902-1933 and anything before 1923 classifies as {{PD-US}}. Many later images may classify as fair use. I have been going nuts finding images for articles. Join the fun.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:26, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

P.S. the Chicago Daily News collection has its own source template. For uploads use {{LOC-cdn}}. Look at the page history at Chicago Race Riot of 1919 to understand usage. I have also been using the newly created {{multiple image}} template in some places such as Chicago Board of Trade Building and Prairie Avenue. You may want to try that if you find a lot of good images for a given article so you don't have to put as many images in a gallery.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:30, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Great find! Thanks for sharing. Zagalejo^^^ 18:37, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Odd instructions, Chicago Blizzard of 1979

I was looking for the "Newly Created Articles" section on the project homepage, but it doesn't seem to exist. So I'll note it here... we didn't have an article for the Blizzard of '79. That was a travesty, so now it's a high-importance stub. :-) Please update articles you think would be relevant accordingly (including Byrne, Bilandic, CTA, etc.) I won't be able to get to them 'til tonight at the earliest... —Rob (talk) 19:46, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I removed the section because it was looking forlorn. No one was adding anything there.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:52, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Top Importance Chicago Articles

If you want to help me choose Category:Top-importance Chicago articles, come comment at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Chicago/Assessment#Current_Top-importance_Candidates by June 5th.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 13:55, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Newly Created List + article

"If you have created a Chicago-related article in the last month, put it in the Newly Created List"... but there's no such list. Little help? I recently recreated a deleted, Chicago-related article (Marshall McGearty Lounge) that I think has potential (and published sources) to at least become a non-stub. If you get as far as its talk page, yes, I am a self-hating Wikipedia editor. Thanks in advance, --dfg (talk) 05:40, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I removed that section because it was not being used as originally intended. Can you help me out with the deletion date. There is no Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marshall McGearty Lounge page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:15, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
It appears to have been speedied in February: [4]. Zagalejo^^^ 06:16, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Yeah it was, but I resurrected it a few days ago. And had an unnecessarily uncivil discussion about it with an admin. Anyhow, it's not an earth-shatteringly important Chicago article, but it has potential to be fleshed out, as I found multiple non-Chicago sources (NYT, WP) about it and posted links on the talk page. In brief, the lounge was a failed attempt by a Big Tobacco company to Starbucks-ize smoking and they picked Chicago (Wicker Park) as ground zero. The smoking ban indirectly killed it. I figured I'd leave a note here in case someone was particularly interested, and since there's the potential to even get a photo of the shuttered establishment by anyone here who bar-hops down there (I don't) if the signage is still up. --dfg (talk) 06:31, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
I think the fact that it was discussed, at length, in the New York Times should save it from deletion. Zagalejo^^^ 06:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Gapers Block: reliable source?

Has anyone in the project had any problems with using Gapers Block (http://www.gapersblock.com/) as a reliable source? I could see how someone could argue that it's a blog, but it's very un-unilateral (non-unilateral?), and the "masthead" appears to include a publisher and several professional journalists. --dfg (talk) 06:07, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

If you were to build an article with it as your sole source of notability you might have trouble. In a larger article where it is the sole source for a single fact or two, I think it would be O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:57, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Important discussion on Chicagoans Barack Obama, Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko

How much information should Obama's bio article have on his embarassing associates -- Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, and Tony Rezko? The Barack Obama Featured Article, part of this project's scope, now has an important discussion about this on its talk page (at Talk:Barack Obama#Attempt to build consensus on the details).

Some editors here think that when a U.S. presidential candidate is embarassed by someone associated with that candidate, no information about it should be mentioned in the WP biography article, even if the campaign (and therefore the person who is the subject of the article) was affected. Others think WP should only mention that this person was controversial and leave a link in the article to the WP article on that controversial associate. Still others (including me), think we should briefly explain just why that person was controversial in the candidate's life, which can be done in a phrase or at most a sentence or two. Other examples:

Whatever we do, we should have equal treatment, so anyone interested in NPOV-, WP:BLP-compliant articles should look at and participate in the discussion. We've started the discussion by focusing on how much to say about former Weather Underground leader Bill Ayers in the Barack Obama article. Noroton (talk) 16:06, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

On some other pages where I've posted this, people have been responding only beneath the post, which is fine, but won't help get a consensus where it counts. So please excuse me for raising my voice, just to make sure I get the point across: Please respond at the Talk:Barack Obama#Attempt to build consensus on the details where your comments will actually affect the consensus!!! Sorry for the shoutin'. I promise not to do it again. Noroton (talk) 18:11, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Millennium Park WP:FT drive

Come check out our Millennium Park articles. We have a WP:FT drive going on. We are focussing on the first line of the following template.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

v • d • e
Millennium Park
Features and attractions
Surrounding streets
Influences
Other
Now we have Cloud Gate, BP Pedestrian Bridge, Lurie Garden, McCormick Tribune Ice Rink, Wrigley Square and Harris Theater (Chicago) all in the WP:GAC queue. The latter ones could use some more beef. If anyone can find anything to add please do, because they are kind of borderline.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:01, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

PLEASE NOTE OUR FEATURED TOPIC DRIVE IS NOW LOCATED AT WP:CHIFTD--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:50, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GAR debate on buildings under construction

There is debate on whether buildings under construction are stable enough and complete enough to be WP:GA. Currently, Good articleChicago Spire, Good articleJoffrey Tower, and Good article108 North State Street are GAs. Thus, the debate is important to our project. Comment would be useful at Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Trump International Hotel and Tower (Chicago)/1.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:32, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Help on List of Registered Historic Places in Chicago

Hi! New article List of Registered Historic Places in Chicago could use help for photos and for tieing its places to existing articles. For example, the National Register name "Lou Mitchell's Restaurant" needed proper wikilinking to the existing article Lou Mitchell's. Photos for a lot of sites have been identified, but there are lots of gaps and it would be great to get current pics to replace some of the historic black&white ones. Thanks! doncram (talk) 02:13, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

We don't have an article titled Garfield Park, but we do have Garfield Park Conservatory, which has a large section discussing the park in general. Zagalejo^^^ 08:22, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! Hmm, okay, i will leave it as a red-link for now, in effect calling for an article on the park to be created. It certainly is notable, it is an NRHP and there are NRHP nomination documents available to describe it.
The Gold Coast Historic District is briefly mentioned in Near North Side, Chicago, but I'm sure one could write a separate article on the Gold Coast. Zagalejo^^^ 08:29, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, likewise, calling for a new article...
Illinois Institute of Technology Academic Campus could probably just be a redirect to Illinois Institute of Technology. Zagalejo^^^ 08:42, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Re Old Colony Buildings: We do have Old Colony Building (Chicago). Is there more than one? Zagalejo^^^ 09:01, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! Now linked, and ended up adding a HABS pic we had already rounded up for the list-article, to the Old Colony Building article. Will leave it to a future editor of that article to sort out why the NRHP program name is plural, probably is explained in the NRHP nomination documents that would be available.
I think the Reid Murdoch Building is the same as the Reid, Murdoch & Co. Building, although the addresses listed are different. Zagalejo^^^ 09:08, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Great, now linked, and got the nice pic from the article to use in the list-article too.
I'm very surpised that I can't find an article on St. Patrick's Roman Catholic Church (AKA Old St. Patrick's Church). That's probably the most well-known landmark that's still a redlink. Zagalejo^^^ 09:21, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Okay, also good to call for that article to be created, too. Thanks so much for all the above comments, and for your other helpful comments on neighborhoods in Talk:List of Registered Historic Places in Chicago! doncram (talk) 05:04, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pics needed

We now have images to illustrate about 99 of the 296 NRHPs in Chicago, which is pretty good for a new list-article. In the process of collecting these, we have added historic HABS pics to a number of articles that already existed for individual landmark sites. However, it sure would be helpful if WP:Chicago members would check out where photos are needed (sort the List of RHPs in Chicago list by neighborhood, and go take new current pics to fill the gaps! doncram (talk) 18:22, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Meetup

This summer? Leave a note at Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Chicago 2#Another_meetup if you're interested. — Dan | talk 02:11, 11 June 2008 (UTC)