Talk:Chicago/Archive 4

message: === Better City Pic ===
I LOVE the new picture. -chi787ord, march 4th, 07
After the last one got removed for copy vio, this new one is a bit underwhelming.  I'm a bit short on time, but I'd just like to flag this as a must do. (- Simulcra 19:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I would agree that this one is pretty boring. Perhaps we should open a formal vote (in a week or so?) with images selected from the commons. Jasenlee 18:40, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why did we switch the cityscape and main Chicago picture? The one with the Wrigley Building doesn't give a good overview of the city and is outdated by the inclusion of the now destroyed Sun-Times building. A classic postcard picture of the skyline from the Museum Campus would be best as the main pic. --spyguy 16:05, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

text: You might consider moving the article to Chicago. Having the article at the city's actual name would be an improvement. Note that this would go against Wikipedia:Naming conventions (city names), however. Given the prominence of the city, there's no good reason it shouldn't located at Chicago. --Yath 22:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Chicago redirects to Chicago, Illinois... (- Simulcra 20:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems ready to go. I'd like to know if anyone else sees anything major that needs to be completed. --Un sogno modesto 18:06, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No - I've been working on this article for more than two years and it has never been ready. At least by the standards of those with the power to say so. So while I would agree a lot of good changes have taken place I think we should take that as a sign to re-double our efforts and polish the article even more to ensure a positive FAC. --Jasenlee 03:44, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well then what needs to be done?  (I've also been working on this article for ~2 years) (- Simulcra 19:39, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You know, I have no idea. I know that's not helpful but I'm just resigned to the fact this will probably never become a FA. Maybe a poor attitude but for some reason this article has always had a dark cloud hanging over it. I've seen some pretty bad FA's that make it but for some reason this one always has something wrong with it. Perhaps we should get the Chicago WikiProject active again and look for ways to make this article not only meet the standards of a FA but stand out by really polishing ever aspect. I know that's a very general response, but again this article never seems to make it. Jasenlee 18:39, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I left that notation on the todo list since currently very few people (myself and Un sogno modesto included) have actually put some time into the article. Hence, if someone else can sign off on the article's not being POV, I will gladly remove that item from the todo list. PentawingTalk 05:26, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Having read the entire article again, I think we are nearly there on NPOV. A lot of what could otherwise be considered boosterism is cited except in the Transportation section. Unfortunately, unless we get some references for "Chicago is the premier transportation hub in America" or some sort of justification, that just isn't going to fly. Sadly, we can't just draw a conclusion on our own like this line does, despite the following lines and paragraphs. Of course, we could just lose that line. Robovski 04:58, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps one way to attain NPOV is to "pretend" not to live in Chicago.  In doing so, phrasing involving the "superlative" could be avoided.  For example, Chicago is the primary transportation hub in the United States.  Definitely a major transportation hub.  But primary?  That's pushing it.  Lower the pride as well.  After all, Go Bears. KyuuA4 07:15, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I tried to tweak it a bit and I think the areas I tweaked look better, but there are some huge sections where I don't know how to make it more aesthetically pleasing.  Just too overwhelming!(-Simulcra 19:19, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there a standard on picture alignment and sizing? I happen to think it looks more interesting when there are different sizes and locations much like you'd find in a print encyclopedia. Jasenlee 18:42, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My question is, do we need so many pictures? Two for sports (both baseball), two for universities. Keep some of those pictures in other, more specific sections. --spyguy 00:18, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Generally you want 'enough' pictures for FA status. As I recall, previously we have failed nomination in part due to not enough free-use pictures. Who is to say how much is too much or too little? All I know is that we should make sure that any picture used is freely usable and preferably not under copyright (using fair-use as little as possible).Robovski 05:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

text:  Please try and make your point a little more clearly. I don't know what you're getting at. As far as I can see you're work hasn't been copied but in some cases referenced, which is entirely valid if you are going to publish something. Again, if you have a point to make please make it. Otherwise just edit the article (like everyone else) to meet the standards you think are fitting rather than complaining.
  
OK, I'll edit it! It must not be stated that New York is the source of "Windy City" because it's not.
Barry Popik 21:04, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Items Under Debate 

message: I LOVE the new picture. -chi787ord, march 4th, 07
After the last one got removed for copy vio, this new one is a bit underwhelming.  I'm a bit short on time, but I'd just like to flag this as a must do. (- Simulcra 19:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I would agree that this one is pretty boring. Perhaps we should open a formal vote (in a week or so?) with images selected from the commons. Jasenlee 18:40, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why did we switch the cityscape and main Chicago picture? The one with the Wrigley Building doesn't give a good overview of the city and is outdated by the inclusion of the now destroyed Sun-Times building. A classic postcard picture of the skyline from the Museum Campus would be best as the main pic. --spyguy 16:05, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better City Pic 

message: There's been a lot of sweeping changes to this article since the last nomination - lots of citations, lots of POV edits... what else needs to be done before anothe rnomination? (- Simulcra 20:18, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You might consider moving the article to Chicago. Having the article at the city's actual name would be an improvement. Note that this would go against Wikipedia:Naming conventions (city names), however. Given the prominence of the city, there's no good reason it shouldn't located at Chicago. --Yath 22:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Chicago redirects to Chicago, Illinois... (- Simulcra 20:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems ready to go. I'd like to know if anyone else sees anything major that needs to be completed. --Un sogno modesto 18:06, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No - I've been working on this article for more than two years and it has never been ready. At least by the standards of those with the power to say so. So while I would agree a lot of good changes have taken place I think we should take that as a sign to re-double our efforts and polish the article even more to ensure a positive FAC. --Jasenlee 03:44, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well then what needs to be done?  (I've also been working on this article for ~2 years) (- Simulcra 19:39, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You know, I have no idea. I know that's not helpful but I'm just resigned to the fact this will probably never become a FA. Maybe a poor attitude but for some reason this article has always had a dark cloud hanging over it. I've seen some pretty bad FA's that make it but for some reason this one always has something wrong with it. Perhaps we should get the Chicago WikiProject active again and look for ways to make this article not only meet the standards of a FA but stand out by really polishing ever aspect. I know that's a very general response, but again this article never seems to make it. Jasenlee 18:39, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is It Ready? 

message: The first paragraph under the History subhead states that Indian tribes "later ceded the land to the United States in the Treaty of St. Louis of 1750." The United States did not exist in 1750 as such, and the link to the article Treaty of St. Louis tells only of treaties dated between 1804 and 1825. I'd correct this, but am not sure what the facts are. David Fell 18:29, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Treaty of St Louis 

message: I've revised a comment implying that the political machine has returned to Chicago, marked by Richard M. Daley's election after Harold Washington.  This is an unsubstantiated claim, and, despite recent developments of city corruption, there has been no connection with the mayor himself, nor has there been any significant evidence of anything *remotely* approximating the political machine of Richard J's reign. (- Simulcra 17:22, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Political Machine 

message: While one of the todo items is to do extensive copyedit and maintain an NPOV, I, for the most part, believe that what is presented in the Chicago article is, in fact, NPOV.  Most of it just happens to be uncited or not elaborated upon, so it happens to come along as boosterism, so I believe working on inline citations and elaborations will also take care of NPOV issues. (- Simulcra 02:54, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I left that notation on the todo list since currently very few people (myself and Un sogno modesto included) have actually put some time into the article. Hence, if someone else can sign off on the article's not being POV, I will gladly remove that item from the todo list. PentawingTalk 05:26, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Having read the entire article again, I think we are nearly there on NPOV. A lot of what could otherwise be considered boosterism is cited except in the Transportation section. Unfortunately, unless we get some references for "Chicago is the premier transportation hub in America" or some sort of justification, that just isn't going to fly. Sadly, we can't just draw a conclusion on our own like this line does, despite the following lines and paragraphs. Of course, we could just lose that line. Robovski 04:58, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps one way to attain NPOV is to "pretend" not to live in Chicago.  In doing so, phrasing involving the "superlative" could be avoided.  For example, Chicago is the primary transportation hub in the United States.  Definitely a major transportation hub.  But primary?  That's pushing it.  Lower the pride as well.  After all, Go Bears. KyuuA4 07:15, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "NPOV" 

message: Please for the love of God will someone fix the layout of pictures in this article! They're everywhere, on both sides, causing huge amounts of white space. It's beyond my wiki-ability to fix at the current moment. RyanGerbil10 04:34, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried to tweak it a bit and I think the areas I tweaked look better, but there are some huge sections where I don't know how to make it more aesthetically pleasing.  Just too overwhelming!(-Simulcra 19:19, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there a standard on picture alignment and sizing? I happen to think it looks more interesting when there are different sizes and locations much like you'd find in a print encyclopedia. Jasenlee 18:42, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My question is, do we need so many pictures? Two for sports (both baseball), two for universities. Keep some of those pictures in other, more specific sections. --spyguy 00:18, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Generally you want 'enough' pictures for FA status. As I recall, previously we have failed nomination in part due to not enough free-use pictures. Who is to say how much is too much or too little? All I know is that we should make sure that any picture used is freely usable and preferably not under copyright (using fair-use as little as possible).Robovski 05:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture Alignment 

message: Wellington (New Zealand) was coined 'Windy City' in 1847, long before Chicago got the name. I think Chicago should change its name to the GANGSTA City. This would bring more tourists into the city and maybe if Chicago council put on free hot dogs and dognuts and coffee at every police station, the cops would get fat and the GANGSTA's could take over again. I like it!! TTT13
This discussion archived to Talk:Windy City (nickname)/Archive 1.
  
Barry Popik here. No scholar at all believes that "Windy City" was either coined or popularized by New York City newspapers in the 1880s. This must be changed immediately. İt is widely known that I found the first "Windy City" citations, all from Cincinnati, Ohıo and pre-1880. The earliest citation is from May 1876, and this was verified by Nathan Bierma in his Chicago Tribune article on "Wındy City" in December 2004. Wikipedia doesn't have to use my work for free, but everyone else is!
:: Please try and make your point a little more clearly. I don't know what you're getting at. As far as I can see you're work hasn't been copied but in some cases referenced, which is entirely valid if you are going to publish something. Again, if you have a point to make please make it. Otherwise just edit the article (like everyone else) to meet the standards you think are fitting rather than complaining.
  
OK, I'll edit it! It must not be stated that New York is the source of "Windy City" because it's not.
Barry Popik 21:04, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Windy City Name 

message: Should we work more on the translations of the article? I am currently working on the da:Chicago version. --OrbitOne 19:42, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Translations 

message: One of the things that is obviously missing from the Chicago entry is Architecture. This is surprising considering that Chicago is the birthplace of the skyscraper and most likely has the best architecture in the entire country. I think a new section for Architecture is needed. In there we can discuss notable styles, schools, architects, buildings and "firsts," and notable skyscrapers both past, present, and future.
:  I agree.  Since we have many great buildings, architects, firsts, schools, and styles.  Could we add it?  Although I am not an architect nor historian, I can get one started.   oclaros1 21:18, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree.  There's already a Chicago architecture article.  I've added a link to it in the "See also" section - I'm surprised there wasn't one already there.  That architecture article could use some work, especially if you have some photographs you could upload.  I feel like a dummy sometimes when I take out-of-town visitors downtown and I can only name a handful of the buildings.  What I would really like to see is a panoramic photo of the skyline (maybe taken from the planetarium) that has all the towers numbered, with a legend below it giving the name of each.  Now that would be cool, especially if it could be done for all major cities. InNuce 02:46, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I've been working on some new images and need opinoins.  Here they are:
 
 
 
Please let me know what suggestions you have. I think the large version is appropriate without the labels. Once the labels are added going to the cropped version of downtown looks much better.  I could use some help naming the rest of the buildings.Buphoff 20:45, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Very sharp. Either the first without the captions or the larger last one with the captions should be used (IMO). Robovski 01:11, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

text: New version of Chicago Skyline with building information.  Thanks to --- Dralwik|Have a Chat  My "Great Project".  Any new labels are VERY much appreciated.  Keep um coming Buphoff 03:42, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Architecture, Skyscrapers, and Skyline 

message: It might also be interesting to point out that Chicago, Illinois has also been host to the largest number of Democratic National Conventions (11), and the largest number of Republican National Conventions (14). Though I'm not sure if this has anything to do with the, "Windy City," nickname, it does connect to politics. Found this interesting little tidbit of trivia playing NTN the other night (and confirmed by looking at the lists of RNC & DNC conventions). Dr. Cash 21:57, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: DNC & RNC National Conventions

message: This statement:
A 2006 estimate puts the city's population at over 3 million. 
is unsubstantiated and should be properly cited. Until then, I have removed it. Chicago has steadily lost population through the past three decades ( with one exception). The 2004 US Census estimate has it at just over 2.7 million, down from the 2.8 (2000) number. The mayor does not like to admit the population loss, and it is an ongoing issue in this city, so please cite the source for this and the conditions for this 1/4 million rise in two years.(Gary Joseph 02:54, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would like to point out that the estimates often underestimate Chicago's population. The 1998 estimate for Chicago was 2,802,000 people, 94,000 less than what the census in 2000 said. I think that it would be more accurate to use the 2000 census data. --- Dralwik|Have a Chat  My "Great Project"
It doesn't make any sense that we are still using the 2005 estimate, 2,842,518, in 2006! There IS a 2006 estimate of Chicago's population, which is 2,873,790. Also, the median family income NEEDS to be updated to $46,748. Now, these "statistics" are from CNN Money, which is an impartial source. No "boosterism" is involved here. Therefore, we should be using these facts or statistics in the introduction, the "demographics" section of the article, and in the table. Thank you. (Mike Madsen 10:00, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Population

message: Well, this article won, so its the collaboration. So what's the story, what all do editors here feel should be improved or worked upon, or do we need pictures or what? Homestarmy 02:06, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Chicago's the headquarters of the ELCA. As a Lutheran, that seems pretty important to me. Wait, I'm trying to escape the religious articles. Never mind. Grigory DeepdelverTalk 17:52, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Got any sources for that? :) Homestarmy 13:27, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it's right on their website. Also, I've heard that the Patriarch of Babylon (head of the Assyrian Church of the East) is in exile in Chicago. Surely we can say something about religion in the demographics section. Anyone have statistics on the religous affiliations of Chicago residents? Grigory DeepdelverTalk 22:26, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, I couldn't see Chicago anywhere on that page. Homestarmy 23:43, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

text: In my experience, most city pages really don't talk about religious breakdowns very much, and this article is already increadibly long. the headquarters thing and that other thing are probably important, but I don't think i've seen any other city articles with anything like breakdown charts by denominations or stuff like that. Homestarmy 00:08, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll look at other city articles, but it seems odd to me not to mention religious demographics. Grigory Deepdelver AKA ArcholaTalk 00:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I can support that - I think we shouldn't lose the information, but if the article is too long it can certainly become an article linked from the main article. Robovski 04:18, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Good Article collaboration

message: The article Kontroll links to Chicago International Film Festival and Gold Hugo Award (probably Golden Hugo Award) – they are presently red links. Does this festival exist? Is it notable? If so, is this the exact name? I'd like to make its link blue if there's any mentioning. Adam78 21:01, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it should be Golden Hugo Award given at the Chicago International Film Festival. The Award dates at least as far back as 1977.Shsilver 21:13, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chicago International Film Festival, Golden Hugo Award? 

message: Found something New York City has on crime statistics, don't have time now, but maybe someone can finish filling in the numbers and other information.
:: Are you asking for similar numbers in Chicago? If so, why don't you work on this yourself? Jasenlee 06:05, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crime stats 

message: What about pictures of the 2006 immigration protests? Chicago had some of the largest. Big event in the city's history.
:I think it premature to label any 2006 event a big event in the city's history.  Historians have not yet had a chance to evaluate the historical significance of such recent events. To make such a claim would probably violate Wikipedia policies on neutral point of view.  DHimmelspach 23:33, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I completely agree with the assessment made by DHimmelspach.
75.21.73.84 01:51, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Immigration protests 

message: So the biggest issue is underreferencing, which makes alot of sense.  There are alot of unqualified statements and qualifiers that seems like boosterism without any proper support.  When I have some time (definitely not this week, busy with ScavHunt) I'll start validating stuff, but I myself am not too well versed or experienced at doing inline citations.  (- Simulcra 21:56, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can just add in links next to information, I can see if I can get the time to convert them to inline citation for you. Homestarmy 23:57, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Let's Make This a Featured Article 

message: There is no page on the Burnham Plan; there is no mention of Daniel Burnham in this article nor does there seem to be any discussion, anywhere, of the extensive system of boulevards and parks which owe their existence to Burnham. John Reid 12:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Then I encourage you to make one. Jasenlee 18:33, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Burnham Plan 

message: Some sections have overlinking. I cleaned up a bit at the top and in Climate. For instance, I removed rain and snow since they're covered under precipitation. Same goes for seasons. I took out NYC & LA because they're mostly relevant as populous cities, and they're covered in that link. Parts of this article are dense with links and hard to read.
--Howdybob 07:19, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too many links? 

message: There's a request open at Requested pictures for maps of Chicago. I've found there are already quite a few maps on wiki and I've been catting them to :Category:Maps of Chicago, Illinois. I've also been drawing new maps to a reasonably consistent scheme. I don't think there's any need for us to serve highly accurate, detailed maps; there are specialized resources for that. But I see plenty of value in maps in general. 
So far I've uploaded an essentially blank map (customize to suit yourself), a freeway map, a waterway map, and one that combines both sets of features. Next on my list are a major street map and a parks and boulevards map. I may do a ward map and an L map. Anything past that will probably be by request only, so put your thinking cap on. 
I use Macromedia FreeHand for all my vector illustration; I have no way to output SVG or convert to it. So, I've uploaded medium-resolution PNGs. If anybody wants to discuss SVG conversion, just ask. John Reid 12:33, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That is found under Neighborhoods of Chicago, whose link is in the see also section. PentawingTalk 23:29, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maps 

message: After working on other U.S. city articles (several towards FA) and looking through this article, I have come to the conclusion that it will never make it to FA in its current state. Hence, I have begun to clean up this article as well as place a "to do" list of what is needed. However, given that I am not from the Chicago area, I would appreciate some help with the material (formatting and wording I can help with, as well as referencing). 
In the end, I hope that when the article is nominated for FA, it will finally pass, in contrast with its previous failures (more than three times if I recall correctly). PentawingTalk 21:09, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea. I'm a Chicagoan, so if you'd like, instant message me sometime and we can discuss some of the issues with the page in more detail. --InShaneee 21:23, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just leave a message on my talk page at the moment (a preference when it comes to Wikipedia). PentawingTalk 21:54, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a message to anyone thinking of attempting another FAC nomination - please look at the to do list at the top. If there are still unresolved items, it is best not to make an attempt until all items have been finished. PentawingTalk 22:26, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major referencing and cleanup needed 

message: Chicago was the center of the Bauhaus, more exactly the New Bauhaus also. It is missing in the article. I don't know much about it, and didn't find much either and I don't want to write false or incorrects things into the article. So I just mention, hope someone, who has bigger knowledge in it reads this and writes it. --195.56.26.179 00:23, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bauhaus

message: How about the city's BIG TIME COURPTION?  I mean we INVENTED (at least the term) ghost voting
:I think 'ghost voting' has been around for some time.  For example, it was prevelent in England and Ireland long before it was happening in Chicago.  Lochdale 23:03, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: City corruption

message: I made somewhat of a living knowing the climate of the Chicago area, and I know for a fact that the data in this article are not correct. I will look for the right numbers, but I know August is the wettest month, it's mentioned in the weather section of the Chicago Tribune fairly frequently, and is so recorded in the sub-article, which I wrote. Hopefully I'll get the right numbers. If anyone knows where these numbers we have now came from, could you please contact me on my talk page? RyanGerbil10 01:52, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Most city pages use Weatherbase.com . It would also be good if someone could make the table smaller (see NYC or Paris for examples)--spyguy 01:09, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Climate Data 

message: Removed from Architecture section.  This passage can be reinserted in to the article at a more appropriate section. KyuuA4 17:37, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Street Layout

message: In the article it says that Chicago is one of three cities to have two Major League Baseball teams.  I know that the Anaheim Angels changed their name to Los Angeles Angels, but they do not play in LA or it's surrounding area.  Anaheim isn't even in the same county as LA. I don't think you can consider them the same as New York and Chicago where both teams actually play in the city or in a suburb of the city.  I suggest making that distinction in the article.Ramsquire 21:45, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If so, please make the distinction yourself. Mrmaroon25 04:57, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sports

message: I am trying to work on a large City Strawpoll to end the feuding about larger cities in the United States. Please visit the page, User:Ericsaindon2/Sandbox and leave comments on the talk page, but dont edit the actual page. After it has been modified to satisfy the community, I will go ahead and open it. But, please review it and comment, to avoid controversy over its structure. I hope to open it in a few days after discussion, so please be timely in making your comments. Thanks. --Ericsaindon2 05:46, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Large City Strawpoll Construction

message: I added the lowest to highest elevation in the city to the city infobox a while back, and I notice that it has been deleted.  It has been replaced by a single elevation.  (I assume this is some average.)  Why has this been done?  Other cities have it both ways, but if both numbers are known they should be used.  --Kalmia 15:11, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elevation 

message: *Demographics section is just a list of statistics and fairly unreadable.  The graph there is pretty illegible too. I would rather you focus on only key statistics and more commentary on what those numbers mean, and spin the rest off.
*Lots of other lists and recitation of statistics throughout the article without commentary that can just be revamped entirely - education, infrastructure, sports, media
*History - The period of Chicago's rapid growth in the late 19th century seems kind of brief.  Only a one line mention of the fire?
*No section in the article gave me much of a sense of the layout of the city...what's it like in the north side?  what's it like in the south side...etc. 
*Blues and jazz mentions are really brief.
*No mention of Frank Lloyd Wright?  Granted he did a lot of his work outside of the city, but he was an influential presence in Chicago.
*Too much detail on crime - significantly reduce the section.
These suggestions were made by DaveOinSF via my Talk page. --Un sogno modesto 04:23, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions for the article 

message: Removed "racially motivated" from this phrase in the Cityscape section. There are many causes for "gentrification" - financial and cultural are probably the most important - but "race" as a motivation seems unlikely (and certainly unsubstantiated). Undeniably, gentrification usually means significant - even radical- change in the racial make-up of an area, but that is an effect rather than a cause. Perhaps "racially significant" rather than "motivated"?
Bog 14:28, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Racially Motivated Gentrification 

message: WHY ISN'T THERE ANY MENTION OF TELEVISION SHOWS BASED OUT OF CHICAGO, OTHER THAN OPRAH???!!!The Jerry Springer Show, Judge Mathis, Ebert & Roeper, Sports Action Team, Sexual Healing, and Soundstage are all popular television shows that are based out of Chicago. Also, popular radio personality, Mancow does his show from the WLS studios. Jonathan Brandmeier does his morning show on 97.9 The Loop. ALL television and radio shows should be mentioned in either the culture section or the media section. User:Senita Fetibegovic 23:22, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Television and Radio Shows in Chicago 

message: The RTA is not another service board but the coordinating organization for the three service boards. It seems that there was some confusion between RTA and some of the service boards. gidonb 00:11, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Transit in Chicago

message: Although I have no actual data, I would suspect as many people pronounce the city's name Chi- caw-go as Chi-cah-go. As far as I can tell, this is not a North Side/South Side or a black/white phenomenon. Any thoughts?
: I've heard people say "Chick-a-go" - doesn't mean they were right. And remember, please sign your comments. Robovski 01:09, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In some ways, it's like the five boroughs of New York. Brooklynites have a distinct accent from Manhattanites and the Bronx. I've heard it different ways, but I definitely can tell who is from the South Side -- and especially from Bridgeport (where I live), by the way people pronounce it: Chic-CAW-go. Mayor Daley is probably the best known example I can think of of the Bridgeport accent. The SNL "Da Bears" sketch comes pretty close to getting the South Side accent right. Mostly though, I think that it's more noticeably a South Side thing than a North Side thing for the same reason Manhattan sounds different from Brooklyn and the Bronx: Manhattan, like the North Side of Chicago, is home to a lot more non-native Chicagoans. South Siders tend to be "lifers" and inasmuch, have not experienced a watering down of the accent due to large numbers of imports from Iowa, Indiana, Michigan etc. That's just my theory though. Ryecatcher773 19:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation of "Chicago" 

message: The Rainbow/Push Coalition and the Nation of Islam have its national headquarters on the south side.  Rainbow/Push Coalition's headquarters is located at 930 E. 50th St. and the Nation of Islam's headquarters is located at 7351 S. Stony Island Ave. Also, Jesse Jackson and Louis Farrakhan DEFINITELY need to be mentioned, since those two are basically the leaders of their respective organizations. All of this needs to be mentioned because it is VERY SIGNIFICANT!!! User:Senita Fetibegovic 18:15, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religious organizations in Chicago 

message: There is a survey in progress at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements) to determine if there is consensus on a proposed change to the U.S. city naming conventions to be consistent with other countries, in particular Canada. --Serge 05:38, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Survey on proposal to make U.S. city naming guidelines consistent with others countries 

message: From Humboldt Park, Chicago:
Most of the neighborhood was annexed into the city in 1869, the year the park was laid out. The fact that this area stood just beyond the city's fire code jurisdiction as set out after the 1871 fire made inexpensively built housing possible.
Where exactly are the borders of this jurisdiction?  Have they changed over the years?  --Kalmia 05:26, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fire code jurisdiction 

message: Why is Chicago's article "Chicago" while the page for Los Angeles is "Los Angeles, California"? Similarly, Philadelphia and New York City (I can understand why New York City's article doesn't have the state name) have no state names in the article title. Yet most other cities do have the state name in their Wikipedia entry titles. Could someone explain to me why this is or if there is a guideline for the naming of city entries? --Lyght 23:54, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because Chicago was considered notable, and someone petitioned for the change, and that change was supported by enough wiki editors to happen. See the Requested Move header above. Robovski 23:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The current guideline at WP:NC:CITY indicates all U.S. cities should be named by the so-called "comma convention", but this is somewhat controversial because following this context-specific convention results in titles like Los Angeles, California that are in conflict with the general naming guidelines that apply to all of Wikipedia, like WP:NAME, which calls for use of the most common name, and WP:DAB, which says titles should not be disambiguated when not necessary.  There is a lot of discussion about this at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements).  In any case, all guidelines allow for exceptions, and for this guideline the current exceptions include New York City, Chicago and Philadelphia.  --Serge 01:06, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If anyone is interested in moving it to Chicago, Illinois, we can propose a move. -Will Beback · † · 00:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Good idea.  In fact, there is an active survey at the top of the Wikipedia Talk:Naming conventions (settlements) page where it has been proposed to rename all major/well-known U.S. cities that do not have ambiguity issues, including Los Angeles, to get rid of the state in their article titles.  I encourage you to share your thoughts and opinions about the issue there.  --Serge 04:44, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Name 

message: OK, so this isn't a 'Good Article'. Today's Featured Article is San Francisco, California and I think this article is as good. Why can't we go for it? Robovski 00:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And Cleveland, Ohio becomes featured today. KyuuA4 07:12, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Featured Article

message: Someone keeps erasing the statement: "Chicago is one of only a few cities to have its major sports teams play within its city limits." I think it is WORTH NOTING and VERY RELEVANT!!! Senita Fetibegovic 00:34, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Major sports teams in Chicago

message: I strongly feel that southwest should be integrated into south side, as historic divisions of the city has been North and South (with a bit of West).  It's not wikipedia's place to try and establish new paradigms of information, so unless you can show me definitive proof of alot of independency that the southwest side has gained in comparison to the south side, this section should be integrated.  (This is the same reason why Northwest Side doesn't get its own section.) -(Simulcra 00:02, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a slight difference, and I have taken the liberty of trying to better define the Southwest Side a bit -- I have always had issues with the name myself. The Southwest Side is an actual designation used by natives, as well as news and traffic people, but it really is kind of a convoluted notion. The main thing about the Southwest Side is that white residents anywhere from Midway to Beverly, usually west of Kedzie, often refer to it as the Southwest Side to define it from the infamous South Side that always seems to pop up on the news with the preceding shooting on the South Side, gang violence on the South Side, etc. Same way the yuppies who moved into teh Western edge of New York's Lower East Side began calling it the "East Village" to sound more affluent/attractive. It may not be independent, but it's still listed on maps and tourism brochures. Ryecatcher773 19:52, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Southwest Side? 

message: I don't have too much time, but someone needs to go through this section.  Over time, it has become bloated.  Bloat isn't necessarily a bad thing, but the entire section is poorly structured and has terrible flow.  -(Simulcra 00:07, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Demographics 

message: It's a template for editors, not readers, so it belongs on the talk page.  It doesn't seem to flow well up there; do what you will. TimBentley (talk) 20:04, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Many editor templates are properly placed on article pages.  Deletion review notices for example are really for editors. They annoyingly end up on article pages, however. :I posted queries at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cities and Wikipedia:Village_pump. TonyTheTiger 22:25, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: CHICOTW template

message: I think the picture should be changed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.21.210.245 (talk) 02:01, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture? 

message: It is not true that all electricity in Northern IL is provided by ComEd. Some suburbs obtain electricity from Wisconsin. I don't know how that works, but I know the suburb I lived in obtained its electricity from Wisconsin and operated its own electric utility company, so all residents and businesses paid the city for their electricity. I changed this in the Utilities section to say "most of Northern IL" Stevevance 19:58, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Utilities of northern Illinois 

message: It is the top New Year's Eve 2007 destination, according to hotwire.com.  Senita Fetibegovic 00:12, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  How about mentioning that Chicago has been '''THE TOP NEW YEAR'S EVE DESTINATION FOR THE PAST THREE YEARS???!!!''' 

message: Stick with the 2006 population estimate of 2,873,790, not the 2005 population estimate of 2,842,518. It's either that or just go with the 2000 Census, which is 2,896,016. WE NEED CONSISTENCY HERE!!! Senita Fetibegovic 18:45, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 1. Get ahold of yourself - there is no need to shout. 2. I don't know if we should be quoting an estimated population over the 'verified' census information. I agree with the need for consistency, is there a consistent way this is handled for US cities? Robovski 00:59, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Other cities do use the most recent reliable estimate (see 1.New York City, 2.Los Angeles, California, 4.Houston, Texas, 5.Philadelphia, 6.Phoenix, Arizona, 7.San Antonio, Texas, 9.Dallas, Texas).  However, they all use the last U.S. Census data available, which to my knowledge is from 2005.  A CNN source is not the best source to use for this because 1. There is a better source available (U.S. Census Bureau, whose sole purpose is to count people).  2. They don't tell what their source is for the data or what the methodology was.  Therefore, the most recent reliable estimate is from 2005.  When the 2006 estimate (actually it will likely be for July 1, 2006) comes out from the U.S. Census Bureau is released, let's add it, but not until then.  (And I would be shocked if the U.S. C.B. estimate is 2,873,790).  Ufwuct 22:46, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''WHY ARE WE GOING WITH THE 2005 POPULATION ESTIMATE AGAIN???!!!''' 

message: A few weeks ago there was some objection to my placment of  on the article page to make people aware of the New and Improved Chicago COTW.  Now that I have several weeks of RESULTS and have the COTW page cleaned up, I hope that I might be able to ask for support for placement on the article page instead of the talk page.  The increased exposure would do wonders to promote my attempt to help cleanup Chicago related pages.  I think any article should promote the most important COTW that supports it. TonyTheTiger 17:46, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reformulated CHICOTW 

message: How about some more Asian love? Is it worth noting that Chicago has the third-largest Chinese population, along with the third-largest Korean population? Illinois also has the third-largest Filipino population, though the majority of it is in the metro Chicago area (95,298 in the whole area and 32,266 in the city as of the 2000 Census)? If all of this is lengthy for the Demographics section of the Chicago page, then this information should definitely be on the Demographics of Chicago page. Senita Fetibegovic 14:30, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Relevant demographics information?

message: A photo of :Kirk Hinrich of the :Chicago Bulls is needed to replace the promo photo in the infobox. Are there any locals who could manage to do this for the wiki? Thanks.--Alf melmac 12:49, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image needed 

message: The Chigago Tribune has reported that a HUGE UFO was seen over O' Hare Airport. This is on several places on Google. Can this be placed in a Trivia section or UFO Incident section ? This UFO matter is all over the place. Martial Law 22:24, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think something like this is probably better for Wikinews as it is a minor current event. Perhaps you could link to the article in the Chicago Portal. Jasenlee 04:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: UFO Incident

message: I personally think we should add a section about ways Daley has done to clean up the city and make it a "green city."  In the main article, we somewhat hint that work is being done for the environment but we never mention what has done and what is being done. --71.82.169.229 07:37, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Environment 

message: I'm moving this down to get some feedback.
Why is it sideways?  It's been like this for a few days now... Chupper 04:13, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK now it's been more than a month...  Any ideas here before I change it, folks? Chupper 03:30, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Chicago Jazz" picture in culture section 

message: Does anyone know of a good college in Chicago that is good for music study? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by KHislove (talk • contribs) 13:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Education  

message: An anonymous user added crime statistics. I marked Chicago's statistics as unsourced (anyone know where these came from? CPD?) and deleted comparisons to NYC and LA. (Immediately beforehand, the article mentions that Chicago computes its crime stats differently. Doesn't that imply that the comparisons would be invalid? Or were these numbers drawn from a source that recomputes these statistics consistently?) LukeDouglas 03:29, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes to crime section 

message: Chicago does not refer to the metropolitan area of Chicago. The name Chicago is given specifically to the city itself, which tends to be why the suburbs of the city all have different names, such as Oak Park and Evanston. The intro line I added sort-of meets the issue half-way, without saying that the word Chicago can refer directly to the metro area. --Solutus 06:50, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: When people say they are "moving to Chicago" they mostly wind up in the suburbs. That's why "Chicago" has always meant more than the city limits. "Chicago" is officially the name of the metro area as well. Rjensen 07:27, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am happy this came up as this is a sore point in the area. The suburbs bristle at the idea that they cannot have an identity of there own because of this "all" is Chicago. But the article needs to be precise and Chicago, is the name of  this city with precise boundaries, a government with jurisdiction over a territory, certain powers, etc. Finally there is no official metro area called "Chicago". The statistical name used for the region is Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, IL-IN-WI Metropolitan Statistical Area. It is used by the Federal government, including the Census Bureau.Gary Joseph 15:27, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

text: The "official" name of the metro area is Chicagoland? No, it was made up by the Tribune. At any rate, it is not well defined. Did you know that there is only one Naperville in the entire US? Let's be open to admitting that the suburbs have something to offer, but they are the suburbs of the city of Chicago. Speciate 21:54, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sorry, but I had to change that first line

message: I don't think so; sounds like a stretch to me. I'd say once you hit, say, Zion, you're pretty much out of the Chicago metro area. Anyone have any more official definitions? +ILike2BeAnonymous 21:02, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See Chicagoland - it's on a 9-county basis. —Rob (talk) 12:49, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I stand (actually sit) corrected. Never mind. +ILike2BeAnonymous 18:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chicagoland extends into Wisconsin??? 

message: Just something curious that I realized while reading this over, there seems to be nearly no mention of anything pertaining to the Catholic Church and it's history here (the only place where it seems to even be mentioned is in the Education section.) However, I realize that this article is already quite long, and perhaps it's not necessary to add such information, though perhaps it should at least be mentioned that Père Jacques Marquette, a Jesuit, was among the first Europeans in the area (if I recall correctly; the wikipedia article on him doesn't say that he was the first, though that he was among the first Europeans to winter in what would become Chicago). I know little how how to edit Wikipedia, alas, and at the moment am unwilling to take chances with editing the page unless others agree that some information should be added. My apologies if this has been addressed already elsewhere, and I have missed it.
63.215.29.212 03:10, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no place named "Chicago" -- there is a city of Chicago (1845) and a metropolitan area of Chicago (1950). Rjensen 16:03, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And what's that supposed to mean, exactly? If you mean about what I said about Marquette, I didn't say that he actually visited the city, but as far as I can tell, he was among the first Europeans to first the area that would become Chicago in the future. 63.215.29.212 22:11, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oversight? Or Simply the lack of space? 

message: Under the history section it stands:
The name "Chicago" comes from the Algonquian word "Chigagou" meaning onion field.
In the end of the same section, under "Toponymy" it is written:
The name "Chicago" is the French rendering of the Miami-Illinois name shikaakwa, meaning wild leek (an analogical extension of the original meaning of "skunk").
These obviousy do not match :-(
Otoomet 20:58, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't write either of the above sentences, but there may not be as much of a discrepancy as you might think. According to other Wikipedia articles the Miami-Illinois language is part of the family of Algonquian languages, and the wild leek (Allium tricoccum) is a member of the onion family. So it seems to me that the two sentences basically say the same thing. —Jeremy (talk) 21:08, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice to hear.  But a slight cleanup wouldn't hurt ;-)  Unfortunately American toponymes are not my strong side.  Otoomet 21:16, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

text: And yet they don't disagree. :)  Clearly the "Toponymy" section is the appropriate place for this information, and Miami-Illinois appears to be the more specific term than Algonquian, but which is the appropriate way to write out the original sound? Gruber76 21:34, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology 

message: I was trying to add a link to "external links" of CHICAGO article but it was deleted by a moderator, I guess. And he suggested bring this point out for a discussion so that's what I am doing now.
Everything that CHICAGO article has at the moment has a "touristy" feel to it: sports, tourism, entertainment sections and the like. There is not much in the article for those who come to LIVE to the city and try to rebuild their life: find a job, start a business or just find friends. There is no mention on how and where to do it. I realise that the link I was trying to add is a blog and blogs are not welcome on Wikipdia but it was the only way to make the site user-friendly: make it possible to upload organizations and events whenever needed and give the opportunity to visitors to comment. The blog doesn't have a commercial value: it provides newcomers with FREE important information on a regular basis (every 5-7 days) on what is happening, where they can turn for help, etc. if they are looking for a job, trying to start their business or looking for friends in Chicago. The organizations DO NOT PAY to be listed on the blog, it's a collection of data that the author digs out from Internet, newspapers, various networks, etc. to make everybody's relocation to Chicago a little bit easier. I believe there is a place for this Chicago Guide on the Chicago city external links. The guide's site is http://legalaliensguideblogspot.com 
Any thoughts?
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Guide7"— Guide7 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.  
:Unfortunatly the external links you suggest do not comply with our guidelines for External links policy. Your contributions to wikipedia  consist mainly of adding external links and is considered  WP:Spam. Looking through your contributions as a whole, ALL are related to promoting this site. Guide7 Contributions. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. Links do not have to be to a "sales site" to be commercial, nor do links have to be commercial to be spam. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a link farm. Cross wiki spamming has also been observed and reported this case. Mutiple wiki spam examples: spammed on es.wikipedia, spammed on fr.wikipedia, spammed on ru.wikipedia.  Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Persistent spamming may have their websites blacklisted as well, preventing anyone from linking to them from any site that uses the MediaWiki spam blacklist, which includes all of Wikimedia and Wikipedia. see WP:SPAM, WP:EL and WP:COI --Hu12 01:26, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there a place for a more practical information? 

message: In the skyline panorama under the "Architecture" subsection (in the "Geography" section), there is something unusual: a bright orange building (near the bright-red CNA Plaza) that is simply not there, and seems to have been added to the picture. --- Dralwik|Have a Chat  My Great Project 02:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's bizarre. My wiki-fu failed me; I can't find the source of the modification. LukeDouglas 22:36, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe it's a case of steganography ... +ILike2BeAnonymous 23:52, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where did that building come from?