Talk:Chicago: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 19:31, 11 August 2006

Latest revision as of 23:08, 21 October 2025

Line 1:

{{move|ChicagoSkip to talk}}

{{facfailedTalk header}}

{{American English}}

{{oldpeerreview}}

{{Article history

{{GA}}

|action1=FAC

{{V0.5|class=A|category=Geography}}

|action1date=21 Dec 2004

{{WikiProject Illinois}}

|action1link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chicago, Illinois/Archive 1

{{ChicagoWikiProject}}

|action1result=not promoted

{{Talk Spoken Wikipedia|Chicago.ogg}}

|action1oldid=8715983

{{todo}}

|action2=FAC

{| align="right" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="border: 1px solid #aaa; padding: 5px; margin: 0em 0em 0.5em 1em; float: right; clear: both;" class="toccolours"

|action2date=30 Apr 2005

! style="border-bottom:3px solid; background:#eee;" | Archives:

|action2link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chicago, Illinois/Archive 2

|-

|action2result=not promoted

|[[Talk:Chicago/Archive|Archive 1]] (December 2004 – May 2005)

|action2oldid=13060421

|-

|[[Talk:Chicago, Illinois/Archive2|Archive 2]] (May 2005 – October 2005)

|-

|[[Talk:Chicago/Archive3|Archive 3]] (September 2005 – February 2006)

|}

|action3=FAC

== Items Under Debate ==

|action3date=17 May 2005

=== Better City Pic ===

|action3link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chicago, Illinois/Archive1

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. (- [[User:Simulcra|Simulcra]] 19:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC))

|action3result=not promoted

|action3oldid=13908075

|action4=PR

=== Is It Ready? ===

|action4date=20:10, 13 July 2005

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? (- [[User:Simulcra|Simulcra]] 20:18, 28 July 2006 (UTC))

|action4link=Wikipedia:Peer review/Chicago, Illinois/archive1

: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'''. --[[User:Yath|Yath]] 22:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

|action4result=reviewed

::[[Chicago]] redirects to [[Chicago, Illinois]]... (- [[User:Simulcra|Simulcra]] 20:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC))

|action4oldid=18763375

:::It seems ready to go. I'd like to know if anyone else sees anything major that needs to be completed. --[[User:Un sogno modesto|Un sogno modesto]] 18:06, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

::::'''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. --[[User:Jasenlee|Jasenlee]] 03:44, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

:::::Well then what needs to be done? (I've also been working on this article for ~2 years) (- [[User:Simulcra|Simulcra]] 19:39, 7 August 2006 (UTC))

|action5=FAC

=== Political Machine ===

|action5date=20:38, 3 August 2005

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. (- [[User:Simulcra|Simulcra]] 17:22, 13 July 2006 (UTC))

|action5link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chicago, Illinois/archive1

|action5result=not promoted

|action5oldid=20213592

|action6=GAN

-It is unsubstantiated, however unless your a tool you know its true if you live in Chicago. While nothing has directly linked Daley yet to illegal activites, at the very least factual NPOV details about the current corrpution probe (led by Fitzgerald) could be included in this article. If was a better editing wikipedian and had more time I'd do it, but alas I pass the buck hoping someone with more experience comes along.

|action6date=18:02, 20 December 2005

|action6result=listed

|action6oldid=32124960

|action7=FAC

It is *not* true if you live in Chicago. It's simply a blase attitude taken up by some of the more ardently cynical or curmudgeonly citizens. I reserve my judgment until someone makes a substantiated claim about the issue. I do agree that perhaps a summary on recent corruption probes could go in the article, I'm not terribly well versed in the current events, so I also pass the buck to someone with more knowledge. (- [[User:Simulcra|Simulcra]] 01:57, 27 July 2006 (UTC))

|action7date=02:49, 26 April 2006

|action7link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chicago, Illinois1

|action7result=not promoted

|action7oldid=50188665

|action8=FAC

=== "NPOV" ===

|action8date=13:54, 29 April 2006

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. (- [[User:Simulcra|Simulcra]] 02:54, 5 July 2006 (UTC))

|action8link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chicago, Illinois/archive2

:I left that notation on the todo list since currently very few people (myself and [[User:Un sogno modesto|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. [[User:Pentawing|Pentawing]]^{[[User_talk:Pentawing|Talk]]} 05:26, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

|action8result=not promoted

|action8oldid=50672622

|action9=PR

=== Picture Alignment ===

|action9date=13:06, 18 June 2006

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. [[User:RyanGerbil10|RyanG]][[User:RyanGerbil10/Esperanza|<font color="green">e</font>]][[User:RyanGerbil10|rbil10]] 04:34, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

|action9link=Wikipedia:Peer review/Chicago, Illinois/archive2

|action9result=reviewed

|action9oldid=59227463

|action10=WAR

|action10date=01:32, 20 June 2006

|action10link=

|action10result=approved

|action10oldid=59541885

|action11=WAR

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!(-[[User:Simulcra|Simulcra]] 19:19, 25 April 2006 (UTC))

|action11date=22:54, 19 April 2007

|action11link=

|action11result=approved

|action11oldid=124187080

|action12=GAR

=== Windy City Name ===

|action12date=October 19, 2007

|action12link=Talk:Chicago/Archive5#GA_on_hold

|action12result=delisted

|action12oldid=165594426

|topic=Geography

''This discussion archived to [[Talk:Windy City, Origin of Name (Chicago)/Archive 0]].''

|currentstatus=DGA

|otd1date=2022-03-04|otd1oldid=1074819993

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!

|otd2date=2023-03-04|otd2oldid=1142777587

:: 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.

}}

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|1=

OK, I'll edit it! It must not be stated that New York is the source of "Windy City" because it's not.

{{WikiProject Chicago|importance=top}}

[[User:Barry Popik|Barry Popik]] 21:04, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

{{WikiProject Illinois|importance=top}}

{{WikiProject Cities|core=y}}

{{WikiProject United States|importance=top}}

{{WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia}}

}}

{{To do}}

{{UScur|date=September 2011}}

{{User:MiszaBot/config

== Discussion ==

|archive=Talk:Chicago/Archive %(counter)d

===Translations ===

|algo=old(30d)

|counter=8

|maxarchivesize=150K

|minthreadsleft=4

|minthreadstoarchive=1

|archiveheader={{Automatic archive navigator}}

}}

== Semi-protected edit request on 8 August 2025 ==

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

{{edit semi-protected|Chicago|answered=yes}}

=== Architecture, Skyscrapers, and Skyline ===

Under "Law and government - Politics", add a new row to the table named "Presidential election results in Chicago", placed above the 2020 row:

Year: 2024

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.

Democratic: 78.25% 775,699

: 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. [[User:Oclaros1|oclaros1]] 21:18, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Republican: 20.56% 203,817

: 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. [[User:InNuce|InNuce]] 02:46, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Others: 1.19% 11,776

=== Ethnicities ===

Source: https://chicagoelections.gov/elections/results/41 [[User:BTNST-206-Seattle|BTNST-206-Seattle]] ([[User talk:BTNST-206-Seattle|talk]]) 09:52, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

What is meant by Chicago being the second-largest Lithuanian city in the world? (The same question applies to other ethnicites mentioned.) Are these Lithuanians, etc., actual Lithuanians or American-Lithuanians? There is an important difference between people who were actually born in a place and those claiming descent but were born in the US (the latter inevitably claim multiple ancestry and produce inflated numbers, not to mention questions about whether their ethnicity is country of origin or US). Are these Lithuanians/Greeks/Assyrians/etc. former citizens of those countries?

== Semi-protected edit request on 18 August 2025 ==

==== Melting Pot in Chicago? I don't think so! ====

The term [[melting pot]] pertains to the population's cultural and racial merger of any given society. Thus, this term shouldn't apply to Chicago due to the fact that it is one of the most racially segregated cities in the nation. I know this is true because I’ve lived in Chicago my whole life, and it kills me when people call it a melting pot. People living in the city and the neighboring suburbs continue to refer to themselves as Irish, Greek, Mexican, Polish, Italian, and so forth, overlooking the fact that they really aren’t those nationalities because they were not born in those respective countries. If you were born in this country, then that makes you an American, and an American only. No one living outside the United States will recognize you otherwise if you’re traveling with an American passport. Yet, stupid, ignorant people who no longer practice the customs and traditions of their respective ethnicities continue to ethnically differentiate themselves from their fellow Americans. They pass this garbage down from generation to generation. Such a concept retained by a significant number of the populous facilitates a racial apartheid that has not phased out in Chicago since it was founded. Our public schools and neighborhoods are racially segregated, and the multicultural curriculum is nothing more than a humorous joke. The only thing funnier than that is calling Chicago a “melting pot.” So change is called for!

{{edit semi-protected|Chicago|answered=yes}}

In the article's explanatory notes section, item a. mentions the Miami-Illinois name of Chicago is "Shikaakwa", which is incorrect according to https://mc.miamioh.edu/ilda-myaamia/dictionary/entries/4363. "Shikaakwa" is a slight corruption of "šikaakwa", which in Miami-Illinois specifically refers to a skunk, garlic, or wild ramp. The correct Miami-Illinois name of the ___location of Chicago is "'''šikaakonki'''", all lowercase (as is common practice in modern Miami-Illinois orthography), and should be provided thus in the article. The "-onki" suffix approximates to English "place of", and therefore the translation is "place of the skunk/garlic/wild ramp". [[User:YaBoiVEVO|YaBoiVEVO]] ([[User talk:YaBoiVEVO|talk]]) 14:00, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

:[[File:Semi-protection-unlocked.svg|28px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:''' According to the page's protection level you should be able to [[Help:Editing|edit the page yourself]]. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details.<!-- Template:ESp --> [[User:Day Creature|Day Creature]] ([[User talk:Day Creature|talk]]) 22:30, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 18 August 2025 (2) ==

: I'm sorry, but is there something wrong with you? This happens in every city and in every Western country with a large influx of immigrants, from New York to Miami to London and Paris. From the 1800's on wards, immigrants from Europe and then later Asia created ethnic enclaves while at the same time trying to assimilate to some degree. I think you also are confusing nationality and ethnicity. Also go read up on apartheid please.

{{Edit semi-protected|Chicago|answered=yes}}

: I lived in Chicago for some 20 years, usually amongst many ethnic groups on the NW side. There is plenty of intermixing, I'm half Slovenian, half mix :) I have had arabic, hispanic, asian and black neighbors, and went to school with them all, and to be honest, it seems most of the 'seperate' nature of some neighbnorhoods comes from the 1st generation immigrants with family who find neighbors like themselves for convenience or because the know/are related to someone there (especially true in the Polish communities). Their children are at the same schools as everyone else's and they integrate. Heck, the immigrants tend to integrate pretty well too. I know what it's like being a foriegner in the land you live in, having spent 6 years here in Scotland. As for being proud of having a heritage, there is nothing wrong with identifying with that heritage. America was made from disperate elements and will continue to in the future. Each new group adds it's touch of flavor to the 'pot', they aren't supposed to disappear without a trace. 'American' isn't just one thing. It's a range of things.[[User:Robovski|Robovski]] 21:52, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

The hyperlink text under the top collage image portraying a panned-out image of the skyline erroneously reads "The Loop". That is, in fact, not the Loop. I suggest changing this to "Chicago Skyline". [[Special:Contributions/2600:1008:A116:552D:95BC:357E:3741:297B|2600:1008:A116:552D:95BC:357E:3741:297B]] ([[User talk:2600:1008:A116:552D:95BC:357E:3741:297B|talk]]) 23:14, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

:[[File:X mark.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done for now:''' please establish a [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] for this alteration '''[[Wikipedia:Edit requests#Planning a request|before]]''' using the {{Tlx|Edit semi-protected}} template.<!-- Template:ESp --> The current caption seems reasonable to me, as it redirects to an article with the same name in the lead and a similar image. We could possibly change the image to match the one in the [[Chicago Loop]] article, but this would benefit from discussion and consensus first. [[User:UmbyUmbreon|UmbyUmbreon]] ([[User talk:UmbyUmbreon|talk]]) 23:40, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

::It's a nice image. I would suggest keeping the image but relabeling it 'Chicago skyline' or 'Architecture of Chicago'. There is an article for [[Architecture of Chicago]]. [[User:E bailey|E bailey]] ([[User talk:E bailey|talk]]) 00:49, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

== Infobox images ==

::Next time you're in Chicago, consider visiting the southside. Then come back on here and try tell sell this "melting pot" fairy tale. I also highly recommend you read Barry Glassner's book, "Fear." Chicago is RACIALLY segregated for the reasons he described. For now, read these articles: http://www.law.fsu.edu/Journals/landuse/Vol141/seit.htm, http://www.substancenews.com/content/view/263/81/

The images for the Chicago River and the L train should both be changed. A river is not a unique aspect of a city and neither is a metro system, even though they are locally famous. Would it not be better to showcase genuinely unique local features such as soldiers field or the cathedral or the bean? [[Special:Contributions/208.79.14.20|208.79.14.20]] ([[User talk:208.79.14.20|talk]]) 08:06, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

::: I have been to the southside (downtown and lots of the suburbs too for that matter) many times in the course of my long residency and the many visits I made to my family and friends over the years. I attended public schools and while I am white I have black and native american relations. The Slavic part of my family has been in Chicago for 4 generations, and while proud of that, I wouldn't be able to find a one that wasn't an American. I'm going to be straight with you - I'm not going to even click on the links of the articles you have thrown up because either: 1. You have recieved some kind of 'education' recently, perhaps read some things recently that played into experiences you've had or beliefs that you would like to hold true, and now hold this to be gosphel, and this will persist until your next 'intellectual authority' tells you something different or 2. You have had radically different experiences than myself and hold very different beliefs than myself. In either case, I'm not going to change you mind, and you aren't going to change mine. Additionally, I'm at work and there is nothing like a waste of time than to trying to change someone's opinion on an internet discussion forum (which this is not BTW). To be plain, I disagree with you, and you disagree with me. And please sign your comments! [[User:Robovski|Robovski]] 04:28, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

== Edit Request: changing incorrect sentence in Demographics section ==

:::: Obviously, someone here is living in a fantasy land, and it's not me! Keep you're fairy tale remarks, I don't care either way. Wikipedia doesn't appear to be a good, CREDIBLE source of information for academia. This site is a waist of time!

The sentence "At the end of the 19th century, Chicago was the 2nd-most populous city in the world, behind New York City." is incorrect and not supported by the source cited (#170). It links to a data table where Chicago is fifth and New York is second.

::::: I've always wondered what a [http://www.familyeducation.com/whatworks/item/front/1,2551,1-9696-11144,00.html waist of time] would look like. Anyway, the point is that there shouldn't be any original research. Someone should source the melting pot comment, which should resolve the quasi-issue. -[[User:Superdosh|Superdosh]] 00:55, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Suggested change: "By the 1890 census, Chicago was the second most populous city in the United States and by 1900, it was the fifth largest in the world behind Berlin, Paris, New York, and London." [[User:CheeseSchmuckius|CheeseSchmuckius]] ([[User talk:CheeseSchmuckius|talk]]) 23:08, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

::: Well, I'm impressed. You claim I live in a fantasy land because I disagree with you based on my real world experiences, can't spell waste, and then continue to fail to sign your posts. I'm leaning heavily towards my first opinion of you. Anyhow, let's see if we can't find some material in support of Chicago and our little 'melting pot' idea beyond various blogs, news reports and news articles...

:::* http://www.milkeninstitute.org/publications/publications.taf?function=detail&ID=113&cat=Arts cites Chicago (amongst other gateway cities) as a place where assimilation of new immgrants still happens (unlike the rest of the USA).

:::* http://www.ailf.org/ipc/MigratingToRecoveryPrint.asp attributes the growth of the Chicago labor force to immigration in the 1990s

:::*http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itsv/0699/ijse/spain.htm cites Chicago as a major destination for immigrants and covers trends in assimilation for the nation as a whole.

::: I am constrained to web resources freely available while searching at work - I would like some better source material as my references are great for supporting Chicago as an immigrant destination/gateway but doesn't cite Chicago specifically in the assimilation needed for 'melting pot' very well (or at all). I will point out that the [[melting pot]] article itself is currently disputed. [[User:Robovski|Robovski]] 02:33, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

==DNC & RNC National Conventions==

It might also be interesting to point out that [[Chicago, Illinois]] has also been host to the largest number of [[Democratic National Convention]]s (11), and the largest number of [[Republican National Convention]]s (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). [[User:Derek.cashman|Dr. Cash]] 21:57, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

==Population==

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.([[User:Gary Joseph|Gary Joseph]] 02:54, 7 April 2006 (UTC))

::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. {{User:Dralwik/Signature}}

'''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.[http://money.cnn.com/magazines/moneymag/bplive/2006/snapshots/PL1714000.html] 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. ([[User:Mike Madsen|Mike Madsen]] 10:00, 18 July 2006 (UTC))'''

That does not make any sense. The 2000 Census did show a rise in population in the city. Anything could have happened in the two years between the 1998 estimate and the 2000 Census ( like a housing boom that added thousands of people back into the city and the new census demographic collection method). There is a whole world difference between a difference of 94,000 and 250,000 in a number that averages 2.7 million. I agree, we should stick to the 2000 number. But I notice 67.162.109.134 put that over 3 million back. I am only saying that if we stick to the US Census and the bureau's estimates, lets do that. But inserting a number that violates those should be cited. It goes back to Wikipedia's credibility. ([[User:Gary Joseph|Gary Joseph]] 07:44, 10 April 2006 (UTC))

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. It is not up for members to speculate on 2006 population projections, especially when the source of the projections tends to be from the mayor's office or other sources that have boosterism as their objective. That being said, we should be relying on official census counts, as those are the counts that actually matter, and 2000 is the last hard one. As for using estimates, the use of non-decade US estimates is a debatable issue, especially since the methodology is not only different from the decade-based counts, but also known to be inherently flawed on urban centers that feature a high immigration rate. That being said, the 2006 estimates can be debated, the 2000 numbers cannot, so let's just stick with the 2000 numbers. (-[[User:Simulcra|Simulcra]] 01:03, 11 April 2006 (UTC))

OK, someone is either making up nonsensical data or there's some obscure census data. However much some of us really want Chicago to bloom, I have found nothing so far demonstrating that "It was estimated in 2006 that the population of Chicago was slightly over 3 million." The latest census estimates put Chicago on a consistent decline, and even older Illinois estimates, which I had looked at before a long time ago and can't seem to find again (which aren't 2006) put Chicago projected, in 2006, at less than 3 million. It doesn't even make sense on a theoretical level; it took 10 years (1990-200) to grow by like 112k people, I highly doubt that all of a sudden Chicago took that same level of growth in a little more than half that. Someone find some solid data backing up that statement, because I'm removing it for now. (- [[User:Simulcra|Simulcra]] 21:04, 23 June 2006 (UTC))

==Good Article collaboration==

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? [[User:Homestarmy|Homestarmy]] 02:06, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

: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. [[User:Archola|Grigory Deepdelver]]^{<small><font color="green">[[User_talk:Archola|Talk]]</font></small>} 17:52, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

::Got any sources for that? :) [[User:Homestarmy|Homestarmy]] 13:27, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

:::Yes, it's right on their [http://www.elca.org 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? [[User:Archola|Grigory Deepdelver]]^{<small><font color="green">[[User_talk:Archola|Talk]]</font></small>} 22:26, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

::::Hmm, I couldn't see Chicago anywhere on that page. [[User:Homestarmy|Homestarmy]] 23:43, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

You didn't look hard enough. If you want an exact page, try [http://www.elca.org/contactus.html the contact page]. To wit:

Evangelical Lutheran Church in America

8765 W. Higgins Road

Chicago, IL 60631

[[User:Archola|Grigory Deepdelver AKA Archola]]^{<small><font color="green">[[User_talk:Archola|Talk]]</font></small>} 23:54, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Also, if you need directions, here a [http://www.elca.org/localmap.html map]. Now, can we talk about the other denominations and other religions in Chicago? [[User:Archola|Grigory Deepdelver AKA Archola]]^{<small><font color="green">[[User_talk:Archola|Talk]]</font></small>} 00:05, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

: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. [[User:Homestarmy|Homestarmy]] 00:08, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

::I'll look at other city articles, but it seems odd to me not to mention religious demographics. [[User:Archola|Grigory Deepdelver AKA Archola]]^{<small><font color="green">[[User_talk:Archola|Talk]]</font></small>} 00:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

If this article is too long already, perhaps we could mention religion in [[Demographics of Chicago]]? That article only mentions ethnicity BTW, why not full demographs? [[User:Archola|Grigory Deepdelver AKA Archola]]^{<small><font color="green">[[User_talk:Archola|Talk]]</font></small>} 00:27, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

: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. [[User:Robovski|Robovski]] 04:18, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

== Chicago International Film Festival, Golden Hugo Award? ==

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. [[User:Adam78|Adam78]] 21:01, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

:Yes, it should be Golden Hugo Award given at the Chicago International Film Festival. The Award dates at least as far back as 1977.[[User:Shsilver|Shsilver]] 21:13, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

== Crime stats ==

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

== Immigration protests ==

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. [[User:DHimmelspach|DHimmelspach]] 23:33, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

== Let's Make This a Featured Article ==

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. (- [[User:Simulcra|Simulcra]] 21:56, 9 May 2006 (UTC))

: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. [[User:Homestarmy|Homestarmy]] 23:57, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

== Burnham Plan ==

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. [[User:John Reid|John&nbsp;]][[User talk:John Reid|Reid]] 12:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

== Too many links? ==

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.

--[[User:Howdybob|Howdybob]] 07:19, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

== Maps ==

There's a request open at [[Wikipedia:Requested pictures|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 [[PNG]]s. If anybody wants to discuss SVG conversion, just ask. [[User:John Reid|John&nbsp;]][[User talk:John Reid|Reid]] 12:33, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

In addition this article doesn't once mention "Gold Coast." A map showing the different areas of Chicago (Boy's Town, Near North, Gold Coast, Lincoln Park, Old Town, etc.) with brief explanations would nice. --E. Seneca, 26 June 2006

:That is found under [[Neighborhoods of Chicago]], whose link is in the ''see also'' section. [[User:Pentawing|Pentawing]]^{[[User_talk:Pentawing|Talk]]} 23:29, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

== Major referencing and cleanup needed ==

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). [[User:Pentawing|Pentawing]]^{[[User_talk:Pentawing|Talk]]} 21:09, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

: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. --[[User:InShaneee|InShaneee]] 21:23, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

::Just leave a message on my talk page at the moment (a preference when it comes to Wikipedia). [[User:Pentawing|Pentawing]]^{[[User_talk:Pentawing|Talk]]} 21:54, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

:::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. [[User:Pentawing|Pentawing]]^{[[User_talk:Pentawing|Talk]]} 22:26, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I got much of the article summarized, copyedited, and referenced. However, there are still some citations that are needed (notably for crime statistics) that I am unable to locate at this time. If someone can find these citations, go ahead. [[User:Pentawing|Pentawing]]^{[[User_talk:Pentawing|Talk]]} 04:52, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

*I believe I have found some sources for the "crime" section for now. Though I am placing the article up for peer review, I would still like to have the content verified by someone else if possible. [[User:Pentawing|Pentawing]]^{[[User_talk:Pentawing|Talk]]} 01:14, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

==Bauhaus==

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. --[[User:195.56.26.179|195.56.26.179]] 00:23, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

==City corruption==

How about the city's BIG TIME COURPTION? I mean we INVENTED (at least the term) ghost voting

== Climate Data ==

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? [[User:RyanGerbil10|RyanG]][[User:RyanGerbil10/Esperanza|<font color="green">e</font>]][[User:RyanGerbil10|rbil10]] 01:52, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

:Most city pages use Weatherbase.com . It would also be good if someone could make the table smaller (see NYC or Paris for examples)--[[User:Spyguy 999|spyguy]] 01:09, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

== Major Overhaul of Photographs on the Main Page ==

Is it just me, or are some of these photos somewhat sub-par to be included on the main Chicago page?

Examples:

1)The huge panorama captioned: The skyline of Chicago at sunset

A decent photo, but it seems oddly out of place at the end of all the mayoral talk.

2)Caption: Children playing in Chicago's Millennium Park

If this is next to demographics, wouldn't it be better to have a photo of something like Greektown, Chinatown, Devon, etc.?

3)Caption: Chicago Board of Trade

I agree with the subject, but a clearer and newer photo is necessary.

4)Caption: Chicago City Hall, shortly before construction was completed in 1911.

Again, why not post a recent photo of City Hall and not a historic one?

5)Caption: CPD Officers making an arrest.

This one I found '''really''' odd. A pic of police arresting a guy does not really look that great on a polished main article. Perhaps an alternative would be a shot of a Chicago police car, or say an officer on a segway.

6)Caption: Cook County Hospital

Although I like the building, this hospital is defunct. A photo of one of the newer structures in the Illinois Medical District or one of Northwestern's many facilities in Streeterville (like the new Prentice) would be better.

7)Caption: The Lake Shore Drive (LSD) Bridge over the Chicago River.

I don't get this one. It is not even a historical photo. It must have been taken in the late 1980's as I don't see many major building.

I do not mean to detract from the photographers. Most of the photos are quite nice, it is just that they are either too old or seem to have little to do with the topics nearby.

*Unfortunately, the photos you mentioned are the only ones readily available under GFDL or public ___domain licenses. In Wikipedia, copyrighted images are highly discouraged (especially when articles must have the ability to be freely distributed without problems. Copyrighted materials pose a legal problem). If you have any better images, please upload them and replace the current images. However, make sure that such images can be freely distributed. [[User:Pentawing|Pentawing]]^{[[User_talk:Pentawing|Talk]]} 01:02, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

::I understand, but I at least want to draw some attention to those photo issues. I will hopefully find some new photos to add that can be freely distributed.--[[User:Spyguy 999|spyguy]] 01:12, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

:''1)The huge panorama captioned: The skyline of Chicago at sunset''

::Although I agree that this could seem misplaced; I actually think that it makes a good break in the article--a chance for someone reading the whole article to pause for a moment.

:''4)Caption: Chicago City Hall, shortly before construction was completed in 1911.''

::The city hall is currently covered in scaffolding (as you can see at [[:Image:Critical Mass Chicago 050826.jpg]]. I tried recently to photograph one of the sides that doesn't have much visible construction work, but the layout of the loop makes this difficult. I intend to try for a photo from Daley plaza once the scaffolding comes down.

:''5)Caption: CPD Officers making an arrest.''

::I agree; I have always forund this an odd photo to include in this article.

:''6)Caption: Cook County Hospital''

::The old prentice is ugly (I have a photo of it if you really want one); the new prentice is unfinished. The other northwestern buildings aren't much to speak of (I work there).

:7)''Caption: The Lake Shore Drive (LSD) Bridge over the Chicago River.''

::I have some more recent photos of this bridge. I didn't upload them because we already have this photo. However, if it is felt that this one should be replaced, I can offer some alternatives.

:We have hundreds of Chicago pictures available to us at the commons. Take a look at the gallery at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Chicago%2C_Illinois and the subcategories of http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Chicago and see if you can find anything that you like better. [[User:JeremyA|JeremyA]] 02:18, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I've substituted a couple of possible alternatives from the commons for the 'crime' and 'transportation' sections. [[User:JeremyA|JeremyA]] 02:40, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

:Looks good so far, though could you provide an image of a Chicago police car instead? Just a preference. [[User:Pentawing|Pentawing]]^{[[User_talk:Pentawing|Talk]]} 03:07, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

::I can't find a police car photo. I'll try to remember to take one the next time I am out with my camera. [[User:JeremyA|JeremyA]] 02:02, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

:::I have seen some police cars on the commons, and I have a decent one myself. However, I do like the picture you have now. The fact that it is more verticle also helps spacing-wise when next to the article.

:::If you could, please shoot a picture of the new Prentice (glassy side corner). I know that it is officially under construction, but from the exterior it is mostly complete. Unrelated, if you have any nice photos of the Palmolive/Playboy Building could you also upload those to use on some architecture/tallest pages.Thanks --[[User:Spyguy 999|spyguy]] 01:39, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Can we put the old picture of the skyline as the main pic on the top on the main page again? This one is alright, but it's very grainy, compressed, and shows only a little bit of the skyline, and not really from a famous angle either. The other picture (at least at a small size) looked pretty cool and did justice to the skyline. --[[User:Spyguy 999|spyguy]] 02:38, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

:Unfortunately, the previous image is marked as "copyrighted," which can pose a problem (generally, for topics such as cities, PD or GFDL-licensed images are preferred since one can easily take a picture and release it freely under such licenses). [[User:Pentawing|Pentawing]]^{[[User_talk:Pentawing|Talk]]} 04:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

::Oh, I didn't know that. Then I suppose we'll have to keep this one until we can come up with a good alternative.

--[[User:Spyguy 999|spyguy]] 15:34, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

== Skyscrapers ==

The statement "...the world's first skyscraper was constructed in 1885 using steel-skeleton construction..." in the History section doesn't seem to jive with the list at [[Skyscraper#History_of_tallest_skyscrapers]]. I'll look into it when I get the time, but I just thought I should bring it up since it could represent (or misrepresent) a '''"[[List of firsts|first]]"'''. See [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Fact and Reference Check|WikiProject Fact and Reference Check]] if you want to help with this sort of thing. Thanks. &bull; [[User:CQ|CQ]] 19:05, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

:I reworded the passage to emphasize the first steel-framed skyscraper ''in Chicago'' rather than ''the world''. Is that better? [[User:Pentawing|Pentawing]]^{[[User_talk:Pentawing|Talk]]} 23:31, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

:: '''Reference''': [[http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/1149.html]]

==Requested move==

[[Chicago, Illinois]] → [[Chicago]] – [[WP:NC(CN)]]; chance for confusion with other things called "Chicago" is minimal.&mdash;[[User:Nat Krause|Nat Krause]]^{([[User talk:Nat Krause|Talk!]])} 18:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

===Survey===

Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

*'''Support''' per nomination.&mdash;[[User:Nat Krause|Nat Krause]]^{([[User talk:Nat Krause|Talk!]])} 18:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

*'''Support'''. --[[User:Usgnus|Usgnus]] 19:22, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

*'''Oppose''' per the [[Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(city_names)#United_States|Naming convention]] that covers city names. [[WP:NC(CN)]] is not the convention that covers city names. The current name follows the convention and is not listed as an exemption. [[User:Vegaswikian|Vegaswikian]] 19:31, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

===Discussion===

Add any additional comments