This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | → | Archive 15 |
Hi Tony, I like this photo a lot. However, the sculpture shown is likely still subject to copyright restrictions, so you need to put a fair use tag on the image description—we have {{ Non-free 3D art}} for just this purpose. See Image:SBC sculpture daytime.jpg for an example of this tag in use. Thanks, — Jeremy ( talk) 01:07, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Visual arts/Infoart articles. You're an art man! Any assistance welcome. Tyrenius 03:12, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
No problem! Some people at Wikipedia:Wikiproject baseball/players were completely adamant that all teams be listed even though it said "Former Teams," so after some discussion, it seemed the one thing everyone could agree on is that if it says "Former teams" then the current team doesn't go there; if it says "Teams" then everything should go there. I think more people had a preference for the "Teams," but it's not really a big deal whether it's former teams or teams.
I figured also that you might be using the commented out MLB summary to help with an improvement drive for the article, so I also felt bad removing it for copyvio, but it's still in the history so we can consult it easily for adding to the article.
Glad that we could sort this out--your contributions have been great, so I hated that we were rubbing each other the wrong way in these reverts. Best, -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 03:51, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Hey, I have noticed you have been adding A LOT of pictures of Chicago, and I say awesome. When you add them, would you mind adding the Category:Images of Chicago, Illinois at the bottom for me. And in the talk area add in a:
{{WikiProject Illinois|class=image}}
Thanks ahead of time, I appreciate it. Helps keep track of all the Illinois pictures for me.-- Kranar drogin 02:37, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Tony!
Sorry for the delay! I think I've got the bot programmed correctly to run through WP:Chi categories on a weekly basis and tag any that have snuck in. However! I can't run that list as it is. The railway categories are still in there, which would cause the bot to tag many many articles that it shouldn't.
There are three possible solutions to this:
Let me know when you've got that set up and I'll fire up the bot :) -- SatyrTN ( talk | contribs) 17:15, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/J. R. Richard. I made the recommended changes, but I left a note about your first recommendation. Thanks, Nishkid64 ( talk) 18:19, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi. When you uploaded Image:20060627 Trump Plaza et al from Atlantic City Expressway.JPG, you did not specify complete source and copyright information. Another user subsequently tagged it with {{ GFDL-presumed}} and, for some time, it has existed on Wikipedia under the assumption that you created the image and you agreed to license it under the GFDL. This assumption, however well-meaning, is not legally sufficient and the tag is being phased out. Images using it are being deleted.
This image has been tagged for deletion and will be deleted in one week if adequate copyright information is not provided.
If you, personally, are the author of this content, meaning that you took the photograph yourself or you created the chart yourself (and it does not use any clipart that you did not create), please retag the image with a free image copyright tag that correctly describes your licensing intentions, usually {{ GFDL-self}} or {{ PD-self}}. Please also make sure if you have not already done so that you write a good description of what the image depicts, when you took the photo, and other important details. This will allow Wikipedia to continue using the image.
If you did not create the image or if it is derived from the copyrighted works of others, please keep in mind that most images on the internet are copyrighted and are not suitable for use on Wikipedia. Wikipedia respects the copyrights of others and does not use images unless we know that they have been freely licensed. Any creative work is automatically copyrighted, even if it lacks a copyright notice. Unless the copyright holder has specifically disclaimed their rights to the image and released it under the GFDL or another compatible license, we cannot use it. If you did not create the image, and cannot make the image compliant with Wikipedia:Non-free content, simply do nothing and it will be deleted in a week. All other non-free images must follow these rules.
Please feel free to contact me on my talk page or leave a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions with any questions you may have. Thank you. Aksibot 07:51, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi. When you uploaded Image:20060627 Trump Plaza from Atlantic City Expressway.JPG, you did not specify complete source and copyright information. Another user subsequently tagged it with {{ GFDL-presumed}} and, for some time, it has existed on Wikipedia under the assumption that you created the image and you agreed to license it under the GFDL. This assumption, however well-meaning, is not legally sufficient and the tag is being phased out. Images using it are being deleted.
This image has been tagged for deletion and will be deleted in one week if adequate copyright information is not provided.
If you, personally, are the author of this content, meaning that you took the photograph yourself or you created the chart yourself (and it does not use any clipart that you did not create), please retag the image with a free image copyright tag that correctly describes your licensing intentions, usually {{ GFDL-self}} or {{ PD-self}}. Please also make sure if you have not already done so that you write a good description of what the image depicts, when you took the photo, and other important details. This will allow Wikipedia to continue using the image.
If you did not create the image or if it is derived from the copyrighted works of others, please keep in mind that most images on the internet are copyrighted and are not suitable for use on Wikipedia. Wikipedia respects the copyrights of others and does not use images unless we know that they have been freely licensed. Any creative work is automatically copyrighted, even if it lacks a copyright notice. Unless the copyright holder has specifically disclaimed their rights to the image and released it under the GFDL or another compatible license, we cannot use it. If you did not create the image, and cannot make the image compliant with Wikipedia:Non-free content, simply do nothing and it will be deleted in a week. All other non-free images must follow these rules.
Please feel free to contact me on my talk page or leave a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions with any questions you may have. Thank you. Aksibot 07:51, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
I have made the necessary corrections, and hope you will reconsider your comments at the FAC. I don't think my baseball writing was at fault; just some grammatical errors here and there (such as the Willoughby bit). Btw, if you have any more corrections, feel free to make the necessary changes yourself. Thanks, Nishkid64 ( talk) 20:44, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:20070602 1700 East 56th Street.JPG. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:1700 East 56th Street.JPG. The copy called Image:1700 East 56th Street.JPG has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.
This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 23:03, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 00:15, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
First, I did virtually nothing. The i.d.'s for most of the paintings were embedded, so all I did was copy info that was there already. I assume it was you who spent the initial hard research time on that--I did the easy work. I will continue to look for the as yet unidentified owners; I think at least one of them is private. As for the painting template: I don't know. Some of these things are just plain over my head. My enthusiastic thanks to you for creating the article, and structuring so much of the content that I've enjoyed tweaking! Best regards, JNW 03:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Hey Tony. I am working on an article about the Emil Bach House (a Chicago Frank Lloyd Wright house) and I was wondering if you could tell me what neighborhood it is, see [1]. Thanks. IvoShandor 08:23, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
I think they probably have enough significant buildings that will eventually be written about to warrant a cat, just haven't gotten around to making the other one. The Ridgeland district has over 1500 contributing properties and the other FLW one has over 80. What did you mean about lists? I don't think any of these articles need lists or tables. IvoShandor 15:55, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Please note that you don't need to use the "templates for deletion" process in order to rename a template. When in doubt, you can discuss this on the talk page; otherwise you can just move them. >Radiant< 09:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
sure next time im by the area ill try to take some more pics of the 'you are beautiful' in other languages . any idea who made this art? who funded it? whose idea it was? cause i gave also seen a bunch of stickers tat say the samew messages all over the city and i wonder if its the same artist
I said that I could not obtain a free equivalent anywhere, and my best option as of now is to use a fair use image. Given my options, I don't think I could really flag down someone who just so happens to have a picture of Richard (he pitched 20-30 years ago). Anyway, I'll put it up for WP:LOCE for now, but any help from you would be appreciated. Nishkid64 ( talk) 22:36, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I think it's more useful to keep information condensed in the main article unless it gets extraoridnarily long, then I'd split it off. Mostly I just try to look at it from the pOV of a reader, what would they expect to find, Board of Trade Bldg or Art Institute bldg, that's the best way to decide. If you do have separate articles be sure to summarize and refer to it from the other article in a section like "additions" or "alterations" or something, use the {{ main article}} or {{ see also}}. Hope that helps and I hope I understood you correctly. : ) IvoShandor 23:42, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I've added Category:Image-Class Chicago articles to {{ ChicagoWikiProject}}. I placed that template onto one image as a test, but it should be possible to put the template onto other images now to populate the Image-Class category. -- Elkman (Elkspeak) 18:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
The article Douglas Park (Chicago) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Douglas Park (Chicago) for things needed to be addressed.
GrooveDog 19:10, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 17:30, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, the renaming thing is mentioned in one of the sources already cited in the paragraph. I just was idly reading the sources, and noticed that it was missing from our article. Speciate 00:04, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Aw man. I'm sorry. I have been kinda preoccupied with my failing RfA. I will try to get to it in the next few days. IvoShandor 16:57, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind words and support at RfA.
IvoShandor has smiled at you! Smiles promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
IvoShandor 18:08, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm glad you asked. The bot ran - see [2] and the next several screens down. It says "weekly LGBT banner search" because I forgot to code that correctly - as you can see from the list, it's trying to add the banner for WP:CHI.
However, it doesn't look like it actually added the tag to many articles. See [3] and scroll down about a page. I have no clue why that happened. I think I'm going to run that now and watch what it does to see if I can catch it. I'll give you an update here in a little bit. -- SatyrTN ( talk | contribs) 20:47, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
I removed the non-breaking spaces to make the page more human-readable. Sure, they are rendered perfectly readable but from other Manual of Style entries ( WP:DASH for example) I read a preference for human-readable markup over non-essential html character encoding. The role of the non-breaking space characters is trivial here—would it be any less readable or proper if there was a line break between the digit and the unit?
If you disagree, let me know and I will change it back. Thank you for your question — Parhamr 00:28, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
hello! i took a wikibreak for about 3-4 weeks, but have now returned with a focus on WPChi, Arch, and NRHP. you can expect my contributions to get back to a significant level rather than the zero level of the last few weeks. i look forward to working with you again on collaborations and achieving an even higher level of success than we had before my break. on a related note, i see that you have continued to develop the WPChi project and for that i offer many thanks. thanks! thanks! thanks! ChicagoPimp 00:54, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
I can add the citations, but not for at least a week. Shsilver 01:26, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Nothing wrong with the format at all. Please acquaint yourself with the rules before you perform counterproductive tasks and make groundless statements again. Chensiyuan 04:05, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
now that i have returned, i will take an active role with you in shepherding this article to FA status. nothing would make me happier than to have this article featured on the main page, and it would be a pinnacle accomplishment for WPChi and for me personally. i will be watching the WP:PR page and will actively address comments. i believe this article has a strong chance to pass the FAC review on the first try as it stands now, but a strong peer review will help, too. ChicagoPimp 22:43, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:20070613 Ludington Building.JPG. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:20070613 Luddington Building.JPG. The copy called Image:20070613 Luddington Building.JPG has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.
This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 14:00, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
There is a concern with a person I removed from the Rockford article. Danica isn't from Rockford, she is from Rockton, and I removed her from the Rockford list. I would like your take on this conversation here [4] if you would be so kind.-- Kranar drogin 22:04, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
There has been a great deal of copyediting done on J. R. Richard by a number of editors (Awadewit, SandyGeorgia and MisfitToys). Would you please take a look at the article and possibly re-evaluate your previous position on the FAC? Thanks, Nishkid64 ( talk) 22:08, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
For the condolences and the barnstar. I like shiny. : ) IvoShandor 11:35, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your support and kind words in my recent, unsuccessful RfA. It's much appreciated. IvoShandor 16:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Old Man Daley did not have a role outside Chicago? How about winning (some say stealing, with substantial evidence) the 1960 election for JFK? How about the 1968 Democratic convention/Police Riot, which likely caused the loss of the White House for the Dems, allowing Dick Nixon to win and leading to Watergate and the only resignation of a sitting President? It changed the course of world history. Perhaps 20,000 GIs and 1 million Vietnamese people died post-1968, and some of those corpses can be laid at Old Man Daley's feet, not to mention the 2 million dead form Pol Pot's genocide in Cambodia, which might not have happened if Nixon had not bombed Cambodia. Name another mayor in the history of the US with as much power when he was mayor. Speciate 09:49, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
When I am archiving, I key off of several pieces of information: the date the request was submitted (or resubmitted for cases where an old request is incorporated as part of a request), the most recent signature time stamp, and if someone other than the requester has made a comment. No attempt is made to evaluate the quality of any comments or feedback. For your request, there was a comment made by User:Maclean25 and the most recent comment was timestamped on June 1. As a result of the comment and the most recent time stamp, the request was archived under the second provision of the Peer review request removal policy (request with no activity for 14 days that had received a response). -- Allen3 talk 16:50, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Hey Tony. You should really consider getting an account on Commons and uploading/moving your pics there. The MOS here recommends against image galleries and instead recommends that we construct them on Commons. Just FYI because I noticed the huge gallery on Magnificent Mile. If you have any questions or comments hit me up. Thanks and happy editing. IvoShandor 12:06, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
The answer I got from the Water Pump is yes. I specifically stated "If something is in commons, is it ok that we are tagging it here on the Wikipedia" I was told "that is perfectly fine". So, that is why I am doing it. I can freely say now that I have ALMOST totally cleaned up all of Category:People from Illinois. Let me tell you, that was a royal pain in the ass. There are a few branches beyond that that will need to be clean up, civil war and stuff, and ESPECIALLY Chicago. The reason I bring this up, is that I have been populating Category:Images of People from Illinois. That is coming along nicely. Well, just figured I would chime in a good explanation here. Sorry! IvoShandor 19:14, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Mr. TheTiger, Can you reconsider adding the architecture tag to every NRHP article? There are now over 6000 architecture articles, and many of them are not architecture worthy of an encyclopedia. Please discontinue adding the architecture tag indiscriminantly to all your great new contributions — especially since they are all in the NRHP project. Respectfully, — Dogears ( talk · contribs) 16:02, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Tony, I have mainly used the locator dot function with templates that use it, such as {{ Infobox_protected_area}}. I have also made use of it in dynamic maps like {{ State parks of Pennsylvania map}} and could do something like the image on the left (the dot is linked to the 333 North Michigan article)
but the dot disappears if someone clicks on the image to see it more clearly. Another alternative is the image at right, with the arrow drawn in by hand. Since Image:20070513 Magnificent Mile arrow.JPG has the arrow in it, it is still there if someone wants to look more closely at the picture.
As for the semi-automated peer reviews, I have the script and can run it for any article in article space (so let me know if you want one or more run). I step in sometimes and do them for all articles at WP:PR when User:AndyZ is taking a break. I did not realize AndyZ was still away, I can work on the semi-automated peer reviews now that I am aware of it. Andy has a semi bot account and can do them a lot faster than I can, so I usually leave them to him.
Hope this helps, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 23:18, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
It looks like the discussion regarding the number of photos took place on your and JeremyA's talk pages. I noticed that you did post the "result" of that discussion on the talk page of the article. However my major edit in May removed many of the pictures as a result of Disavian's review failing the article's GA nomination. One of the points he stated was "(never thought I'd say it, but:) too many pictures". In the "05.09.07 Edits" section on the article's talk page I stated "Removed pictures - as mentioned for one of the reasons why this article failed GA, we have way too many pictures here. I've removed a lot of them. Unless the text of this article expands, the current gallery and infobox picture will suffice. Be aware that I'm only using pictures in the gallery that showed measurable progress just from looking at thumbnails with a quick glance." At the time I was looking for a better flow of the article using pictures I found significant enough to be used considering the relatively small amount of prose that currently exists.
After reviewing WP:MOS it seems that any number of pictures in the gallery would be OK. I just tried to keep, as mentioned on the article's talk page & above, that images in the gallery showing a measurable progress (from a quick glance). I thought that would be more beneficial to readers. But I didn't realize I bypassed a consensus between you and JeremyA. Feel free to add any and all pictures back in. Chupper 16:04, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Hey Tony, I am getting closer to cleaning Category:People from Chicago. There are a few sub-cats in there, and I will have to create a few more to put football players in etc. So, even though I was guilty of creating one like Chicago baseball players, I think I am going to name them more like Football players from Chicago, similar to Actors from Chicago. I just think that sounds a lot better, and we can move the other sub-cats. I just wanted to get with you first and see what your opinion is since you head up the Chicago Wiki. I usually don't step too much into Chicago, but the People From for Illinois REALLY needed cleaning and better organization.-- Kranar drogin 03:26, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
-- Congrats on making the lead entry! I'm aware that usually the COTW templates make the main article, but given the placement on the Main Page (which should hopefully encourage edits in the same manner), would you mind if the template is removed for a few hours? I'm just looking to avoid having comments about it spring up on the article's talk page, Talk:Main Page, Wikipedia talk:Did you know and God knows where else. I'll make sure to re-add it myself once the next update is prepared and transferred :) GeeJo (t)⁄ (c) • 15:48, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi there. You have good timing! Although I've been inactive for a bit, I've been meaning to come back now that a couple of things in my professional life have calmed down. :) If you feel Colbert is ready for FAC, I'll be available to help clean up problems that come up in the process. Although I've been away, the article is looks to be mostly in the same shape I left it in, so it'll probably be good if I'm around -- I'm pretty sure I can still recall what articles have which factiods if sourcing questions arise. I'll take another look at the article tonight. -- Bailey (talk) 17:20, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
TonyTheTiger, I wanted to let you know that I incorporated content from the Ukrainian Village District under the Ukrainian Village, Chicago. The city and neighborhood templates you created plus the reference were included, along with a section itself. Take a look around, and see if I missed anything. Best regards, -- Riurik (discuss) 23:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Tony, I tweaked your solution to the caption problem with the Chris Young infobox. Let me know what you think. Cheers, Caknuck 00:11, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Tony. Nice photo at Chris Young (baseball pitcher). I looked at the original image and zoomed into the ball. Is there a way for you to photoshop the original photo by placing a large, zoomed in picture of his hand on the ball in the sky of the image at Image:20070616 Chris Young visits Wrigley (4).JPG to show exactly how he holds the ball. I think such a photo would be awesome. -- Jreferee ( Talk) 00:25, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
i'll take a look at the article over the next few days, and likely will add some details, do a copy edit, etc. regarding research, i usually start with google results and then refine from there. typically, i'll use a search string such as "crown fountain architecture", then "crown fountain artist", then "crown fountain magazine", then "crown fountain controversy", then "crime fountain crime", etc. basically, i use what i am searching for (in this case, crown fountain) and then add a word or two for what i am looking for. from there, i get more detailed based on whatever i find in the early strings. obviously, this is somewhat easier for locations/things that have been around a while and was quite easy for the chicago theatres, CBOT, locations on the NRHP, etc. btw, for a recently created article, the content is strong! LurkingInChicago 01:20, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
I would like to draw attention to an assessment that I think is off. St. John Cantius in Chicago has been rated as a stub of low importance. Although I am biased since I am the author of the article, I think this is clearly not the case because of the following:
Is this really a low importance stub? -- Orestek 05:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Hey Tony, I have started the process for two of the subcats to be renamed at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 June 19. This just means the names will change to my proposals if it passes. Figured I would let you know incase you want to nominate the others. Otherwise, it will have to wait until tonight and I will do it then. This is a five day process, so I figured I would post these up and work on that other category in the meantime. Also, Ivo if you see this, if you can go there and give your opinion or another Ill/Chicago members. Thanks guys!-- Kranar drogin 11:14, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
the articles are:
St. Stanislaus Kostka in Chicago St. Mary of the Angels in Chicago
enjoy! -- Orestek 08:45, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
we received feedback from a bot, most of which is likely not applicable. however, i will make an effort over the next two days to address the "easier" suggestions such as adding non-breaking spaces, proper unit conversions, ensuring all images are fair use and in the commons, and incorporating the pictures of the statues into the main body of the article. i am hoping that addressing some of the bot suggestions will attract other editors to peer review the article as i am not too confident that the article will pass FAC as it stands. (but we are getting closer, yippee!) LurkingInChicago 14:18, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I will be away for a while, but will re-connect when I return. Best wishes, JNW 14:32, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Tony,
I know it is not the best thing to say at the moment, but I am REALLY busy in RL now and, as you might have noticed, I have almost totally ceased any GA-related activity (and barely even edit Wikipedia those days). All I can say now is that I have no "axe to grind" against you and there is nothing personal. I do understand your position on the Chicago Theatre article and I acknowledge my failure to properly complete the delisting procedure. I apologize for making you feel that way about it.
I hope you will excuse me for being unable to hold a substantial discussion on that at the moment. I believe Ivo Shandor can give you some good clues as concerns GA reviews and how to improve CHICOTW articles, if he would have the time.
Kind regards,
PrinceGloria 16:15, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
it took me a while to get back to your request about a reference for the symbol on the marquee. i found a chi public library reference, so i updated the text and added the reference. btw, this link http://cpl.lib.uic.edu/004chicago/chisymbols.html has some pretty cool information regarding city symbols that we may be able to incorporate into other chi related articles such as buildings, bridges, etc that may contain the symbol. LurkingInChicago 21:21, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
However the article does not list those accomplishments. She played volleyball in a D3 athletic program, and won several awards. How does that make a person notable? Just being good at a sport does guarantee notability and I see no evidence of her prominence.- thank you Astuishin ( talk) 23:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Can you please give me a further assessment on the progress I have made to bring Michael Barrett's article to GA status? Thanks for your time and patience. -- ►ShadowJester07 04:50, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I am going over Cook County on NACo. Here is a list of places that I assume are unincorporated communities, right? The list:
- AMF O'Hare - Argo - Ashburn Park - Auburn Park - Bank of America - Charles A Hayes - Chestnut Street - Chicago Lawn - Clearing - Cloverdale - Cragin - Division Street - Edgebrook - Elsdon - Englewood - Forestview - Fort Dearborn - Garfield Park - Glenview NAS - Graceland - Grand Crossing - Haymarket - Hegewisch - Hines - Hubbard Woods - Hyde Park - Irving Park - Ivanhoe - Jackson Park - Jefferson Park - Kedzie Grace - La Grange Highlands - Lakeview - Lincoln Park - Logan Square - Loop - Loop Station - Merchandise Mart - Morgan Park - Mount Greenwood - Nancy B Jefferson - North Town - Northtown - Ogden Park - Ontario Street - Ontarioville - Otto Mall - Pilsen - Ravenswood - Roger P. Mc Auliffe - Rogers Park - Roseland - South Chicago - Stock Yards - Summit-Argo - Techny - Twenty Second Street - Wicker Park
Some of these have really strange names if that is the case. Can you let me know what some of these are? I am working on List of unincorporated communities in Illinois , and want to make sure that I get this right.-- Kranar drogin 21:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay - have been busy with another wiki issue and then some private matters. Thanks for the message on this issue. I have gone through the article again carefully and have added my comment. Best wishes. -- VS talk 12:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Sorry about that. It's one mistake I keep making. Thanks for the heads-up; I have just fixed it.— Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • ( yo?); 23:30, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Is that even possible? Well, I didn't think it was until I looked at Chris Young. I don't think 99 references are needed for one player with not a whole lot of notoriety with the exception of throwing at Derrek Lee. I come to you because I have seen that you have made most of the edts to that page. May I suggest that you trim the amount of references down and combine references? By that, I mean that there are some areas in that article where you talk about a particular game and have like three or more references for that. It looks kinda sloppy to see "[1][2][3][1][3][2][4][5][2][5][6][4][7]" everywhere in the article. It's really hard to read the article when there are so many citations in the article. Just a suggestion; it would greatly improve the article and help improve its status to "Good Article," at least. -- Ksy92003 (talk) 19:03, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
I, myself, would only want the recaps. My reason for this is because a box score only gives stats on the game. The recap gives the really important stats in sentence form, which is what the articles are. The articles are sentences, also, so using those citations means you have sentences which are cited by other sentences that discuss the stats, not just the stats themselves. Another reason is that using the game recaps may help lower the amount of citations in the article. Reading the game recaps can help determine which game is important, meaning that if he is significantly mentioned in the game recap, most likely the game is worthy enough.
But there are some parts of the article that have numerous citations for the same sentence, like this: "His five starts in June were highlighted by a career high twelve strikeout performance on June 9, 2006 against the Florida Marlins and a June 21, 2006 win over his former team, the Texas Rangers.[45][58][59][60][61]" I don't think you really need 5 citations for one sentence. Another thing that kinda bothers me about this is the fact that it jumps from 45 to 61, meaning that in between the first time "reference 45" is used to here, there are (at least) 16 other citations.
Now here are the similar references I've spotted, followed by how many references I think are necessary:
There are also several parts of this article that are unrelated to Young, which I think can be removed (not in any particular order, just the order that I found it in). These following sections could be better placed in San Diego Padres:
And I still think that only one reference is needed for one sentence, not five, four, or more.
Reference 24 is his player profile. It doesn't need to be referenced 15 times. It's his player profile for the 2004 season, which I believe is only necessary at the end of the 2004 season section.
Reference 16 is "The Top 20 Greatest Athletes." Why is that referencing his personal life?
Reference 44 is his player profile for 2005. Again, I believe it is only necessary to reference it at the end of the 2005 season section.
Reference 56 is his player profile for 2006. "Broken record," end of 2006 season section
References 97-103 are about the Cubs/Padres brawl. I believe that it is only necessary to have one reference for the fight and one for the suspension. The other 5 we can do away with.
Reference 77 is a blog written by Young. A blog itself isn't valid as a source, even an autobiographical blog.
"In November 2006, he traveled to Japan to take part in the Major League Baseball Japan All-Star Series.[77][78] Young was the starter in an exhibition game against the Yomiuri Giants which was memorable for the Major leaguers' three run ninth inning rally to earn a tie.[79] This game was the prelude to the 5-game series which began with three games at the Tokyo Dome and was followed by games in Osaka, Japan and Fukuoka, Japan.[80] Young pitched the fourth game of the series. Young also blogged on behalf of mlb.com about daily life during the trip. He detailed visits with United States Ambassador to Japan Tom Schieffer, time in the Harajuku, and travels on the Bullet Train.[77]"
Again, not every single game needs to be mentioned. I would mention games like his closest no-hitter, career-high for strikeouts in a game, the brawl, team/rookie records, and I don't think that every single season needs its own section, maybe a section for his pre-MLB years, a section for his Rangers years, and a section for his Padres years. I would remove anything that doesn't directly relate to Chris Young, like Trevor Hoffman and Jake Peavy in the competition for the NL Pitcher of the Month award. The part that says, "The day before the fracus, Alfonso Soriano homered off David Wells, and upset the Padres with his admiration and celebration of his own work. He stopped at the plate to admire the ball and then started his home run trot with a few steps backward," isn't directly related to Young, but is indirectly. First, it should be before the mention of the HBP. Second, shorten it to saying something like "the Padres weren't happy that Alfonso Soriano took his time to round the bases."
Also, the pictures in the 2005 season section are just pictures of him warming up before a game. First, I would remove those pictures because it isn't any different than his picture in the infobox, just a different angle of a different pitch. Second, those pictures would belong in the 2007 season, anyway.
This is a really good article, no doubt. But it has way too much information. This isn't a game-by-game biography of Chris Young. I believe only the most important, extremely crucial stats should be included such as the aforementioned personal bests, team/rookie records, notable events like the brawl, how close he came to that no hitter in 2005, etc.
I counted over 200 times in the article that something was referenced. I don't think any FA comes close to that amount. It's very hard to read the article to see [1][5][48][38][2][7][4][85][35][74] everywhere. It needs flow so it's easier to read, and by that I mean the references are distracting and make it more difficult to read. A lot of duplicate references I think need to be removed and a lot of the excess information about every single game should be cut and only kept in if it's notable, such as those career/team highs, etc. -- Ksy92003 (talk) 07:12, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your message Tony - not having much time with a lot happening in real life and watching my RfA for potential questions. I will get to the request you have a little later in the week if that is okay?-- VS talk 04:16, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't really do stubs, I found the process too tedious. But if you'll recall, I did stub Allan Miller House and wrote a pretty decent article for Emil Bach House. I will try to help where I can by creating good quality articles about Chicago Landmarks, as you know my interests cross paths frequently with said Landmarks. Sorry I can't be of help with the stubfication, it's just not my cup of tea, but I'll help where I can. IvoShandor 19:58, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
I would have done more last night but lost power. I did my first attempt, and before I continue I would like it looked at All Saints Church and Rectory 2007-06-26. I did not find this building anywhere except in the Chicago Landmarks, so I have noted it as so and removed most of the NHL etc listing. Let me know.-- Kranar drogin 10:46, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
It was about 60, eh? Cool! Thanks for the awards too! Glad to have been of assistance. If you need something like that again, let me know.-- Kranar drogin 16:24, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, I have been swamped at work. I'm sure other people have been having fun in the sun. I did a lot of stubs myself, and once in a while I do another one. Speciate 20:42, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
-- Carabinieri 21:35, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Is the Fort King Site supposed to be listed here? There is a Fort King in Florida, but I see no such site in this list of Illinois NHLs. The link provided in the footnote is confusing; it seems to contain a desciption of the Robert Abbott house, an NHL which is in Chicago (but is not mentioned in our article). Zagalejo 23:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Response copied to Kranar drogin's talk page too-Just a few comments, because this discussion is one that I feel like commenting on :-)
That is all for now folks. IvoShandor 14:52, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, but I don't really know anything about Chicago. I just stubified an article. I'd help if I could, but I'm sorry I can't. Cheers, Je tL ov er 21:09, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your support and comments at my RfA | ||
Hi Tony, Whilst we have been wiki friends for some time and your personalised comment was a pleasure to read, it still amazes me that otherwise "anonymous" editors take the time to place !votes and comments on RfAs. Whilst I would have normally thanked you at the time of you leaving your message, the importance of my not appearing to be canvassing prevented me from so doing. Now that everything has progressed successfully I can finally thank you. I intend to uphold a style of good adminship and will welcome your further comments at any time in the future, even if they are in the form of admonishment. I will be happy to help as an admin wherever and whenever I can -- VS talk 00:05, 28 June 2007 (UTC) |
i took some time and created 5 stubs for the landmark list: Brewster Apartments, Bush Temple of Music, Chapin and Gore Building, Chicago Building, and Chicago Varnish Company Building. i have added a list of articles on the project page under the section for articles created in the last 30 days. i sourced the initial info from the chicago landmarks website, mentioned NRHP listing dates where appropriate, added "see also" and "refereces" sections to each article, and added project banners (without importance, class, etc) on the talk pages. unfortunately, i didn't add references yet and not much is wikified, but i have plans to work on each of the articles over the next week, including adding references, adding more content, wikify, copy edit, etc. i'll also be adding public domain pics into the commons and into the articles, since most of what i have worked on has very old pics available. as time allows, i'll work to do at least 5 more redline articles on the list.
it is my opinion that we should have a stub article created for all redline articles before submission for review/comments about becoming a FL. just an opinion, but it may improve our chances of achieving FL status on the first try.
btw....this stubification effort could result in multiple DYK's if we can get others to participate (which may improve visibility of the project, not to mention viability) in the next few days, let me know what you think about what the best candidates may be. i am open to assisting in copy edit efforts before submission to DYK. LurkingInChicago 00:07, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
I "borrowed" some text from a very good source on the Club and put it on the talk page with a question about how much of it is appropriate to use. Could you take a look-see? Speciate 03:55, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, I never thought about doing another tree... I would like to but it seems like the Kennedys would be a huge task. I think I can do it, but it will take a while. 70.113.24.254 15:29, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Why did you remove the scroll box? If it was ever needed it is need on this article. TonyTheTiger 15:44, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
I had already supported, but I can make my support full if that'll alleviate your worries. Circeus 02:25, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Tony, awhile back we were attempting to create a template for each county, and to keep them pretty much the same across the board. Some people in the Chicago area didn't want to have a few of the templates in the Chicagoland area to be the same as the rest of the state. You can see the ones that are different at Wikipedia:WikiProject Illinois/Templates, plus the points of view on the talk page. This was something I shelved for the time being, but now that I am almost done with all the townships (only 15 more counties to go) I would like to have those counties changed. I wanted to run it by you first, but if you don't want to change that is fine.
The ones that I would like to get changed are DuPage County, Illinois, Kane County, Illinois, Kankakee County, Illinois, Kendall County, Illinois, Lake County, Illinois, and McHenry County, Illinois. Specifically I would like to remove "Points of Interest", "Higher Education", "Hospitals", and "Transportation" (other than airports), and move these to just the County page. Eventually I would like to convert I think to Template:US county navigation box as Sangamon County, Illinois has been done. What are your thoughts on all this as you head up the Chicago Project. Maybe this is something you will need to open up to your entire group. As it is, those templates do not match what is suppose to be the "standard" by the states. All the other IL counties simply need to change a few things.-- Kranar drogin 03:46, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Compton House is a stately home in the village of Over Compton, which is where the (limited amount of) info on that house is currently located (but one day I hope to expand it). If the Arthur H. Compton House is also likely to be looked up under the name Compton House, then I suggest that the Compton House entry should become a geodis page saying something like
Richard Pinch 17:22, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
i acted on your feedback. silly oversight on my part. i have a long wikifairy/wikignome document with all of my wiki favorite templates, categories, stubs, banners, etc. but in my excitement i forgot to use it. over the last two days i have worked on the articles i previously created (as have others) and all are in much better shape. i have also created new articles and project tagged a few random chi-related articles i ran across. a personal goal over the next week is to keep working on the landmark list to eliminate all redlinks. i'll start by creating the article for Commission on Chicago Landmarks. LurkingInChicago 22:51, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
... is up for AfD again. Robert K S 01:55, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for that. I have no clue why I labeled it as I did. -- Woohookitty Woohoo! 04:11, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Cool. I have voted for it. I don't know much about it either, but it seems it is the only one in Cook County. That dot map isn't totally complete though either, so if you didn't go through all the articles towards the bottom (he was working form the top down), there might be another down there.-- Kranar drogin 05:42, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | → | Archive 15 |
Hi Tony, I like this photo a lot. However, the sculpture shown is likely still subject to copyright restrictions, so you need to put a fair use tag on the image description—we have {{ Non-free 3D art}} for just this purpose. See Image:SBC sculpture daytime.jpg for an example of this tag in use. Thanks, — Jeremy ( talk) 01:07, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Visual arts/Infoart articles. You're an art man! Any assistance welcome. Tyrenius 03:12, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
No problem! Some people at Wikipedia:Wikiproject baseball/players were completely adamant that all teams be listed even though it said "Former Teams," so after some discussion, it seemed the one thing everyone could agree on is that if it says "Former teams" then the current team doesn't go there; if it says "Teams" then everything should go there. I think more people had a preference for the "Teams," but it's not really a big deal whether it's former teams or teams.
I figured also that you might be using the commented out MLB summary to help with an improvement drive for the article, so I also felt bad removing it for copyvio, but it's still in the history so we can consult it easily for adding to the article.
Glad that we could sort this out--your contributions have been great, so I hated that we were rubbing each other the wrong way in these reverts. Best, -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 03:51, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Hey, I have noticed you have been adding A LOT of pictures of Chicago, and I say awesome. When you add them, would you mind adding the Category:Images of Chicago, Illinois at the bottom for me. And in the talk area add in a:
{{WikiProject Illinois|class=image}}
Thanks ahead of time, I appreciate it. Helps keep track of all the Illinois pictures for me.-- Kranar drogin 02:37, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Tony!
Sorry for the delay! I think I've got the bot programmed correctly to run through WP:Chi categories on a weekly basis and tag any that have snuck in. However! I can't run that list as it is. The railway categories are still in there, which would cause the bot to tag many many articles that it shouldn't.
There are three possible solutions to this:
Let me know when you've got that set up and I'll fire up the bot :) -- SatyrTN ( talk | contribs) 17:15, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/J. R. Richard. I made the recommended changes, but I left a note about your first recommendation. Thanks, Nishkid64 ( talk) 18:19, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi. When you uploaded Image:20060627 Trump Plaza et al from Atlantic City Expressway.JPG, you did not specify complete source and copyright information. Another user subsequently tagged it with {{ GFDL-presumed}} and, for some time, it has existed on Wikipedia under the assumption that you created the image and you agreed to license it under the GFDL. This assumption, however well-meaning, is not legally sufficient and the tag is being phased out. Images using it are being deleted.
This image has been tagged for deletion and will be deleted in one week if adequate copyright information is not provided.
If you, personally, are the author of this content, meaning that you took the photograph yourself or you created the chart yourself (and it does not use any clipart that you did not create), please retag the image with a free image copyright tag that correctly describes your licensing intentions, usually {{ GFDL-self}} or {{ PD-self}}. Please also make sure if you have not already done so that you write a good description of what the image depicts, when you took the photo, and other important details. This will allow Wikipedia to continue using the image.
If you did not create the image or if it is derived from the copyrighted works of others, please keep in mind that most images on the internet are copyrighted and are not suitable for use on Wikipedia. Wikipedia respects the copyrights of others and does not use images unless we know that they have been freely licensed. Any creative work is automatically copyrighted, even if it lacks a copyright notice. Unless the copyright holder has specifically disclaimed their rights to the image and released it under the GFDL or another compatible license, we cannot use it. If you did not create the image, and cannot make the image compliant with Wikipedia:Non-free content, simply do nothing and it will be deleted in a week. All other non-free images must follow these rules.
Please feel free to contact me on my talk page or leave a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions with any questions you may have. Thank you. Aksibot 07:51, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi. When you uploaded Image:20060627 Trump Plaza from Atlantic City Expressway.JPG, you did not specify complete source and copyright information. Another user subsequently tagged it with {{ GFDL-presumed}} and, for some time, it has existed on Wikipedia under the assumption that you created the image and you agreed to license it under the GFDL. This assumption, however well-meaning, is not legally sufficient and the tag is being phased out. Images using it are being deleted.
This image has been tagged for deletion and will be deleted in one week if adequate copyright information is not provided.
If you, personally, are the author of this content, meaning that you took the photograph yourself or you created the chart yourself (and it does not use any clipart that you did not create), please retag the image with a free image copyright tag that correctly describes your licensing intentions, usually {{ GFDL-self}} or {{ PD-self}}. Please also make sure if you have not already done so that you write a good description of what the image depicts, when you took the photo, and other important details. This will allow Wikipedia to continue using the image.
If you did not create the image or if it is derived from the copyrighted works of others, please keep in mind that most images on the internet are copyrighted and are not suitable for use on Wikipedia. Wikipedia respects the copyrights of others and does not use images unless we know that they have been freely licensed. Any creative work is automatically copyrighted, even if it lacks a copyright notice. Unless the copyright holder has specifically disclaimed their rights to the image and released it under the GFDL or another compatible license, we cannot use it. If you did not create the image, and cannot make the image compliant with Wikipedia:Non-free content, simply do nothing and it will be deleted in a week. All other non-free images must follow these rules.
Please feel free to contact me on my talk page or leave a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions with any questions you may have. Thank you. Aksibot 07:51, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
I have made the necessary corrections, and hope you will reconsider your comments at the FAC. I don't think my baseball writing was at fault; just some grammatical errors here and there (such as the Willoughby bit). Btw, if you have any more corrections, feel free to make the necessary changes yourself. Thanks, Nishkid64 ( talk) 20:44, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:20070602 1700 East 56th Street.JPG. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:1700 East 56th Street.JPG. The copy called Image:1700 East 56th Street.JPG has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.
This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 23:03, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 00:15, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
First, I did virtually nothing. The i.d.'s for most of the paintings were embedded, so all I did was copy info that was there already. I assume it was you who spent the initial hard research time on that--I did the easy work. I will continue to look for the as yet unidentified owners; I think at least one of them is private. As for the painting template: I don't know. Some of these things are just plain over my head. My enthusiastic thanks to you for creating the article, and structuring so much of the content that I've enjoyed tweaking! Best regards, JNW 03:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Hey Tony. I am working on an article about the Emil Bach House (a Chicago Frank Lloyd Wright house) and I was wondering if you could tell me what neighborhood it is, see [1]. Thanks. IvoShandor 08:23, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
I think they probably have enough significant buildings that will eventually be written about to warrant a cat, just haven't gotten around to making the other one. The Ridgeland district has over 1500 contributing properties and the other FLW one has over 80. What did you mean about lists? I don't think any of these articles need lists or tables. IvoShandor 15:55, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Please note that you don't need to use the "templates for deletion" process in order to rename a template. When in doubt, you can discuss this on the talk page; otherwise you can just move them. >Radiant< 09:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
sure next time im by the area ill try to take some more pics of the 'you are beautiful' in other languages . any idea who made this art? who funded it? whose idea it was? cause i gave also seen a bunch of stickers tat say the samew messages all over the city and i wonder if its the same artist
I said that I could not obtain a free equivalent anywhere, and my best option as of now is to use a fair use image. Given my options, I don't think I could really flag down someone who just so happens to have a picture of Richard (he pitched 20-30 years ago). Anyway, I'll put it up for WP:LOCE for now, but any help from you would be appreciated. Nishkid64 ( talk) 22:36, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I think it's more useful to keep information condensed in the main article unless it gets extraoridnarily long, then I'd split it off. Mostly I just try to look at it from the pOV of a reader, what would they expect to find, Board of Trade Bldg or Art Institute bldg, that's the best way to decide. If you do have separate articles be sure to summarize and refer to it from the other article in a section like "additions" or "alterations" or something, use the {{ main article}} or {{ see also}}. Hope that helps and I hope I understood you correctly. : ) IvoShandor 23:42, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I've added Category:Image-Class Chicago articles to {{ ChicagoWikiProject}}. I placed that template onto one image as a test, but it should be possible to put the template onto other images now to populate the Image-Class category. -- Elkman (Elkspeak) 18:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
The article Douglas Park (Chicago) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Douglas Park (Chicago) for things needed to be addressed.
GrooveDog 19:10, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 17:30, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, the renaming thing is mentioned in one of the sources already cited in the paragraph. I just was idly reading the sources, and noticed that it was missing from our article. Speciate 00:04, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Aw man. I'm sorry. I have been kinda preoccupied with my failing RfA. I will try to get to it in the next few days. IvoShandor 16:57, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind words and support at RfA.
IvoShandor has smiled at you! Smiles promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
IvoShandor 18:08, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm glad you asked. The bot ran - see [2] and the next several screens down. It says "weekly LGBT banner search" because I forgot to code that correctly - as you can see from the list, it's trying to add the banner for WP:CHI.
However, it doesn't look like it actually added the tag to many articles. See [3] and scroll down about a page. I have no clue why that happened. I think I'm going to run that now and watch what it does to see if I can catch it. I'll give you an update here in a little bit. -- SatyrTN ( talk | contribs) 20:47, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
I removed the non-breaking spaces to make the page more human-readable. Sure, they are rendered perfectly readable but from other Manual of Style entries ( WP:DASH for example) I read a preference for human-readable markup over non-essential html character encoding. The role of the non-breaking space characters is trivial here—would it be any less readable or proper if there was a line break between the digit and the unit?
If you disagree, let me know and I will change it back. Thank you for your question — Parhamr 00:28, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
hello! i took a wikibreak for about 3-4 weeks, but have now returned with a focus on WPChi, Arch, and NRHP. you can expect my contributions to get back to a significant level rather than the zero level of the last few weeks. i look forward to working with you again on collaborations and achieving an even higher level of success than we had before my break. on a related note, i see that you have continued to develop the WPChi project and for that i offer many thanks. thanks! thanks! thanks! ChicagoPimp 00:54, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
I can add the citations, but not for at least a week. Shsilver 01:26, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Nothing wrong with the format at all. Please acquaint yourself with the rules before you perform counterproductive tasks and make groundless statements again. Chensiyuan 04:05, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
now that i have returned, i will take an active role with you in shepherding this article to FA status. nothing would make me happier than to have this article featured on the main page, and it would be a pinnacle accomplishment for WPChi and for me personally. i will be watching the WP:PR page and will actively address comments. i believe this article has a strong chance to pass the FAC review on the first try as it stands now, but a strong peer review will help, too. ChicagoPimp 22:43, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:20070613 Ludington Building.JPG. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:20070613 Luddington Building.JPG. The copy called Image:20070613 Luddington Building.JPG has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.
This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 14:00, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
There is a concern with a person I removed from the Rockford article. Danica isn't from Rockford, she is from Rockton, and I removed her from the Rockford list. I would like your take on this conversation here [4] if you would be so kind.-- Kranar drogin 22:04, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
There has been a great deal of copyediting done on J. R. Richard by a number of editors (Awadewit, SandyGeorgia and MisfitToys). Would you please take a look at the article and possibly re-evaluate your previous position on the FAC? Thanks, Nishkid64 ( talk) 22:08, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
For the condolences and the barnstar. I like shiny. : ) IvoShandor 11:35, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your support and kind words in my recent, unsuccessful RfA. It's much appreciated. IvoShandor 16:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Old Man Daley did not have a role outside Chicago? How about winning (some say stealing, with substantial evidence) the 1960 election for JFK? How about the 1968 Democratic convention/Police Riot, which likely caused the loss of the White House for the Dems, allowing Dick Nixon to win and leading to Watergate and the only resignation of a sitting President? It changed the course of world history. Perhaps 20,000 GIs and 1 million Vietnamese people died post-1968, and some of those corpses can be laid at Old Man Daley's feet, not to mention the 2 million dead form Pol Pot's genocide in Cambodia, which might not have happened if Nixon had not bombed Cambodia. Name another mayor in the history of the US with as much power when he was mayor. Speciate 09:49, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
When I am archiving, I key off of several pieces of information: the date the request was submitted (or resubmitted for cases where an old request is incorporated as part of a request), the most recent signature time stamp, and if someone other than the requester has made a comment. No attempt is made to evaluate the quality of any comments or feedback. For your request, there was a comment made by User:Maclean25 and the most recent comment was timestamped on June 1. As a result of the comment and the most recent time stamp, the request was archived under the second provision of the Peer review request removal policy (request with no activity for 14 days that had received a response). -- Allen3 talk 16:50, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Hey Tony. You should really consider getting an account on Commons and uploading/moving your pics there. The MOS here recommends against image galleries and instead recommends that we construct them on Commons. Just FYI because I noticed the huge gallery on Magnificent Mile. If you have any questions or comments hit me up. Thanks and happy editing. IvoShandor 12:06, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
The answer I got from the Water Pump is yes. I specifically stated "If something is in commons, is it ok that we are tagging it here on the Wikipedia" I was told "that is perfectly fine". So, that is why I am doing it. I can freely say now that I have ALMOST totally cleaned up all of Category:People from Illinois. Let me tell you, that was a royal pain in the ass. There are a few branches beyond that that will need to be clean up, civil war and stuff, and ESPECIALLY Chicago. The reason I bring this up, is that I have been populating Category:Images of People from Illinois. That is coming along nicely. Well, just figured I would chime in a good explanation here. Sorry! IvoShandor 19:14, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Mr. TheTiger, Can you reconsider adding the architecture tag to every NRHP article? There are now over 6000 architecture articles, and many of them are not architecture worthy of an encyclopedia. Please discontinue adding the architecture tag indiscriminantly to all your great new contributions — especially since they are all in the NRHP project. Respectfully, — Dogears ( talk · contribs) 16:02, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Tony, I have mainly used the locator dot function with templates that use it, such as {{ Infobox_protected_area}}. I have also made use of it in dynamic maps like {{ State parks of Pennsylvania map}} and could do something like the image on the left (the dot is linked to the 333 North Michigan article)
but the dot disappears if someone clicks on the image to see it more clearly. Another alternative is the image at right, with the arrow drawn in by hand. Since Image:20070513 Magnificent Mile arrow.JPG has the arrow in it, it is still there if someone wants to look more closely at the picture.
As for the semi-automated peer reviews, I have the script and can run it for any article in article space (so let me know if you want one or more run). I step in sometimes and do them for all articles at WP:PR when User:AndyZ is taking a break. I did not realize AndyZ was still away, I can work on the semi-automated peer reviews now that I am aware of it. Andy has a semi bot account and can do them a lot faster than I can, so I usually leave them to him.
Hope this helps, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 23:18, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
It looks like the discussion regarding the number of photos took place on your and JeremyA's talk pages. I noticed that you did post the "result" of that discussion on the talk page of the article. However my major edit in May removed many of the pictures as a result of Disavian's review failing the article's GA nomination. One of the points he stated was "(never thought I'd say it, but:) too many pictures". In the "05.09.07 Edits" section on the article's talk page I stated "Removed pictures - as mentioned for one of the reasons why this article failed GA, we have way too many pictures here. I've removed a lot of them. Unless the text of this article expands, the current gallery and infobox picture will suffice. Be aware that I'm only using pictures in the gallery that showed measurable progress just from looking at thumbnails with a quick glance." At the time I was looking for a better flow of the article using pictures I found significant enough to be used considering the relatively small amount of prose that currently exists.
After reviewing WP:MOS it seems that any number of pictures in the gallery would be OK. I just tried to keep, as mentioned on the article's talk page & above, that images in the gallery showing a measurable progress (from a quick glance). I thought that would be more beneficial to readers. But I didn't realize I bypassed a consensus between you and JeremyA. Feel free to add any and all pictures back in. Chupper 16:04, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Hey Tony, I am getting closer to cleaning Category:People from Chicago. There are a few sub-cats in there, and I will have to create a few more to put football players in etc. So, even though I was guilty of creating one like Chicago baseball players, I think I am going to name them more like Football players from Chicago, similar to Actors from Chicago. I just think that sounds a lot better, and we can move the other sub-cats. I just wanted to get with you first and see what your opinion is since you head up the Chicago Wiki. I usually don't step too much into Chicago, but the People From for Illinois REALLY needed cleaning and better organization.-- Kranar drogin 03:26, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
-- Congrats on making the lead entry! I'm aware that usually the COTW templates make the main article, but given the placement on the Main Page (which should hopefully encourage edits in the same manner), would you mind if the template is removed for a few hours? I'm just looking to avoid having comments about it spring up on the article's talk page, Talk:Main Page, Wikipedia talk:Did you know and God knows where else. I'll make sure to re-add it myself once the next update is prepared and transferred :) GeeJo (t)⁄ (c) • 15:48, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi there. You have good timing! Although I've been inactive for a bit, I've been meaning to come back now that a couple of things in my professional life have calmed down. :) If you feel Colbert is ready for FAC, I'll be available to help clean up problems that come up in the process. Although I've been away, the article is looks to be mostly in the same shape I left it in, so it'll probably be good if I'm around -- I'm pretty sure I can still recall what articles have which factiods if sourcing questions arise. I'll take another look at the article tonight. -- Bailey (talk) 17:20, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
TonyTheTiger, I wanted to let you know that I incorporated content from the Ukrainian Village District under the Ukrainian Village, Chicago. The city and neighborhood templates you created plus the reference were included, along with a section itself. Take a look around, and see if I missed anything. Best regards, -- Riurik (discuss) 23:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Tony, I tweaked your solution to the caption problem with the Chris Young infobox. Let me know what you think. Cheers, Caknuck 00:11, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Tony. Nice photo at Chris Young (baseball pitcher). I looked at the original image and zoomed into the ball. Is there a way for you to photoshop the original photo by placing a large, zoomed in picture of his hand on the ball in the sky of the image at Image:20070616 Chris Young visits Wrigley (4).JPG to show exactly how he holds the ball. I think such a photo would be awesome. -- Jreferee ( Talk) 00:25, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
i'll take a look at the article over the next few days, and likely will add some details, do a copy edit, etc. regarding research, i usually start with google results and then refine from there. typically, i'll use a search string such as "crown fountain architecture", then "crown fountain artist", then "crown fountain magazine", then "crown fountain controversy", then "crime fountain crime", etc. basically, i use what i am searching for (in this case, crown fountain) and then add a word or two for what i am looking for. from there, i get more detailed based on whatever i find in the early strings. obviously, this is somewhat easier for locations/things that have been around a while and was quite easy for the chicago theatres, CBOT, locations on the NRHP, etc. btw, for a recently created article, the content is strong! LurkingInChicago 01:20, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
I would like to draw attention to an assessment that I think is off. St. John Cantius in Chicago has been rated as a stub of low importance. Although I am biased since I am the author of the article, I think this is clearly not the case because of the following:
Is this really a low importance stub? -- Orestek 05:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Hey Tony, I have started the process for two of the subcats to be renamed at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 June 19. This just means the names will change to my proposals if it passes. Figured I would let you know incase you want to nominate the others. Otherwise, it will have to wait until tonight and I will do it then. This is a five day process, so I figured I would post these up and work on that other category in the meantime. Also, Ivo if you see this, if you can go there and give your opinion or another Ill/Chicago members. Thanks guys!-- Kranar drogin 11:14, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
the articles are:
St. Stanislaus Kostka in Chicago St. Mary of the Angels in Chicago
enjoy! -- Orestek 08:45, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
we received feedback from a bot, most of which is likely not applicable. however, i will make an effort over the next two days to address the "easier" suggestions such as adding non-breaking spaces, proper unit conversions, ensuring all images are fair use and in the commons, and incorporating the pictures of the statues into the main body of the article. i am hoping that addressing some of the bot suggestions will attract other editors to peer review the article as i am not too confident that the article will pass FAC as it stands. (but we are getting closer, yippee!) LurkingInChicago 14:18, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I will be away for a while, but will re-connect when I return. Best wishes, JNW 14:32, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Tony,
I know it is not the best thing to say at the moment, but I am REALLY busy in RL now and, as you might have noticed, I have almost totally ceased any GA-related activity (and barely even edit Wikipedia those days). All I can say now is that I have no "axe to grind" against you and there is nothing personal. I do understand your position on the Chicago Theatre article and I acknowledge my failure to properly complete the delisting procedure. I apologize for making you feel that way about it.
I hope you will excuse me for being unable to hold a substantial discussion on that at the moment. I believe Ivo Shandor can give you some good clues as concerns GA reviews and how to improve CHICOTW articles, if he would have the time.
Kind regards,
PrinceGloria 16:15, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
it took me a while to get back to your request about a reference for the symbol on the marquee. i found a chi public library reference, so i updated the text and added the reference. btw, this link http://cpl.lib.uic.edu/004chicago/chisymbols.html has some pretty cool information regarding city symbols that we may be able to incorporate into other chi related articles such as buildings, bridges, etc that may contain the symbol. LurkingInChicago 21:21, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
However the article does not list those accomplishments. She played volleyball in a D3 athletic program, and won several awards. How does that make a person notable? Just being good at a sport does guarantee notability and I see no evidence of her prominence.- thank you Astuishin ( talk) 23:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Can you please give me a further assessment on the progress I have made to bring Michael Barrett's article to GA status? Thanks for your time and patience. -- ►ShadowJester07 04:50, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I am going over Cook County on NACo. Here is a list of places that I assume are unincorporated communities, right? The list:
- AMF O'Hare - Argo - Ashburn Park - Auburn Park - Bank of America - Charles A Hayes - Chestnut Street - Chicago Lawn - Clearing - Cloverdale - Cragin - Division Street - Edgebrook - Elsdon - Englewood - Forestview - Fort Dearborn - Garfield Park - Glenview NAS - Graceland - Grand Crossing - Haymarket - Hegewisch - Hines - Hubbard Woods - Hyde Park - Irving Park - Ivanhoe - Jackson Park - Jefferson Park - Kedzie Grace - La Grange Highlands - Lakeview - Lincoln Park - Logan Square - Loop - Loop Station - Merchandise Mart - Morgan Park - Mount Greenwood - Nancy B Jefferson - North Town - Northtown - Ogden Park - Ontario Street - Ontarioville - Otto Mall - Pilsen - Ravenswood - Roger P. Mc Auliffe - Rogers Park - Roseland - South Chicago - Stock Yards - Summit-Argo - Techny - Twenty Second Street - Wicker Park
Some of these have really strange names if that is the case. Can you let me know what some of these are? I am working on List of unincorporated communities in Illinois , and want to make sure that I get this right.-- Kranar drogin 21:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay - have been busy with another wiki issue and then some private matters. Thanks for the message on this issue. I have gone through the article again carefully and have added my comment. Best wishes. -- VS talk 12:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Sorry about that. It's one mistake I keep making. Thanks for the heads-up; I have just fixed it.— Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • ( yo?); 23:30, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Is that even possible? Well, I didn't think it was until I looked at Chris Young. I don't think 99 references are needed for one player with not a whole lot of notoriety with the exception of throwing at Derrek Lee. I come to you because I have seen that you have made most of the edts to that page. May I suggest that you trim the amount of references down and combine references? By that, I mean that there are some areas in that article where you talk about a particular game and have like three or more references for that. It looks kinda sloppy to see "[1][2][3][1][3][2][4][5][2][5][6][4][7]" everywhere in the article. It's really hard to read the article when there are so many citations in the article. Just a suggestion; it would greatly improve the article and help improve its status to "Good Article," at least. -- Ksy92003 (talk) 19:03, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
I, myself, would only want the recaps. My reason for this is because a box score only gives stats on the game. The recap gives the really important stats in sentence form, which is what the articles are. The articles are sentences, also, so using those citations means you have sentences which are cited by other sentences that discuss the stats, not just the stats themselves. Another reason is that using the game recaps may help lower the amount of citations in the article. Reading the game recaps can help determine which game is important, meaning that if he is significantly mentioned in the game recap, most likely the game is worthy enough.
But there are some parts of the article that have numerous citations for the same sentence, like this: "His five starts in June were highlighted by a career high twelve strikeout performance on June 9, 2006 against the Florida Marlins and a June 21, 2006 win over his former team, the Texas Rangers.[45][58][59][60][61]" I don't think you really need 5 citations for one sentence. Another thing that kinda bothers me about this is the fact that it jumps from 45 to 61, meaning that in between the first time "reference 45" is used to here, there are (at least) 16 other citations.
Now here are the similar references I've spotted, followed by how many references I think are necessary:
There are also several parts of this article that are unrelated to Young, which I think can be removed (not in any particular order, just the order that I found it in). These following sections could be better placed in San Diego Padres:
And I still think that only one reference is needed for one sentence, not five, four, or more.
Reference 24 is his player profile. It doesn't need to be referenced 15 times. It's his player profile for the 2004 season, which I believe is only necessary at the end of the 2004 season section.
Reference 16 is "The Top 20 Greatest Athletes." Why is that referencing his personal life?
Reference 44 is his player profile for 2005. Again, I believe it is only necessary to reference it at the end of the 2005 season section.
Reference 56 is his player profile for 2006. "Broken record," end of 2006 season section
References 97-103 are about the Cubs/Padres brawl. I believe that it is only necessary to have one reference for the fight and one for the suspension. The other 5 we can do away with.
Reference 77 is a blog written by Young. A blog itself isn't valid as a source, even an autobiographical blog.
"In November 2006, he traveled to Japan to take part in the Major League Baseball Japan All-Star Series.[77][78] Young was the starter in an exhibition game against the Yomiuri Giants which was memorable for the Major leaguers' three run ninth inning rally to earn a tie.[79] This game was the prelude to the 5-game series which began with three games at the Tokyo Dome and was followed by games in Osaka, Japan and Fukuoka, Japan.[80] Young pitched the fourth game of the series. Young also blogged on behalf of mlb.com about daily life during the trip. He detailed visits with United States Ambassador to Japan Tom Schieffer, time in the Harajuku, and travels on the Bullet Train.[77]"
Again, not every single game needs to be mentioned. I would mention games like his closest no-hitter, career-high for strikeouts in a game, the brawl, team/rookie records, and I don't think that every single season needs its own section, maybe a section for his pre-MLB years, a section for his Rangers years, and a section for his Padres years. I would remove anything that doesn't directly relate to Chris Young, like Trevor Hoffman and Jake Peavy in the competition for the NL Pitcher of the Month award. The part that says, "The day before the fracus, Alfonso Soriano homered off David Wells, and upset the Padres with his admiration and celebration of his own work. He stopped at the plate to admire the ball and then started his home run trot with a few steps backward," isn't directly related to Young, but is indirectly. First, it should be before the mention of the HBP. Second, shorten it to saying something like "the Padres weren't happy that Alfonso Soriano took his time to round the bases."
Also, the pictures in the 2005 season section are just pictures of him warming up before a game. First, I would remove those pictures because it isn't any different than his picture in the infobox, just a different angle of a different pitch. Second, those pictures would belong in the 2007 season, anyway.
This is a really good article, no doubt. But it has way too much information. This isn't a game-by-game biography of Chris Young. I believe only the most important, extremely crucial stats should be included such as the aforementioned personal bests, team/rookie records, notable events like the brawl, how close he came to that no hitter in 2005, etc.
I counted over 200 times in the article that something was referenced. I don't think any FA comes close to that amount. It's very hard to read the article to see [1][5][48][38][2][7][4][85][35][74] everywhere. It needs flow so it's easier to read, and by that I mean the references are distracting and make it more difficult to read. A lot of duplicate references I think need to be removed and a lot of the excess information about every single game should be cut and only kept in if it's notable, such as those career/team highs, etc. -- Ksy92003 (talk) 07:12, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your message Tony - not having much time with a lot happening in real life and watching my RfA for potential questions. I will get to the request you have a little later in the week if that is okay?-- VS talk 04:16, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't really do stubs, I found the process too tedious. But if you'll recall, I did stub Allan Miller House and wrote a pretty decent article for Emil Bach House. I will try to help where I can by creating good quality articles about Chicago Landmarks, as you know my interests cross paths frequently with said Landmarks. Sorry I can't be of help with the stubfication, it's just not my cup of tea, but I'll help where I can. IvoShandor 19:58, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
I would have done more last night but lost power. I did my first attempt, and before I continue I would like it looked at All Saints Church and Rectory 2007-06-26. I did not find this building anywhere except in the Chicago Landmarks, so I have noted it as so and removed most of the NHL etc listing. Let me know.-- Kranar drogin 10:46, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
It was about 60, eh? Cool! Thanks for the awards too! Glad to have been of assistance. If you need something like that again, let me know.-- Kranar drogin 16:24, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, I have been swamped at work. I'm sure other people have been having fun in the sun. I did a lot of stubs myself, and once in a while I do another one. Speciate 20:42, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
-- Carabinieri 21:35, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Is the Fort King Site supposed to be listed here? There is a Fort King in Florida, but I see no such site in this list of Illinois NHLs. The link provided in the footnote is confusing; it seems to contain a desciption of the Robert Abbott house, an NHL which is in Chicago (but is not mentioned in our article). Zagalejo 23:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Response copied to Kranar drogin's talk page too-Just a few comments, because this discussion is one that I feel like commenting on :-)
That is all for now folks. IvoShandor 14:52, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, but I don't really know anything about Chicago. I just stubified an article. I'd help if I could, but I'm sorry I can't. Cheers, Je tL ov er 21:09, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your support and comments at my RfA | ||
Hi Tony, Whilst we have been wiki friends for some time and your personalised comment was a pleasure to read, it still amazes me that otherwise "anonymous" editors take the time to place !votes and comments on RfAs. Whilst I would have normally thanked you at the time of you leaving your message, the importance of my not appearing to be canvassing prevented me from so doing. Now that everything has progressed successfully I can finally thank you. I intend to uphold a style of good adminship and will welcome your further comments at any time in the future, even if they are in the form of admonishment. I will be happy to help as an admin wherever and whenever I can -- VS talk 00:05, 28 June 2007 (UTC) |
i took some time and created 5 stubs for the landmark list: Brewster Apartments, Bush Temple of Music, Chapin and Gore Building, Chicago Building, and Chicago Varnish Company Building. i have added a list of articles on the project page under the section for articles created in the last 30 days. i sourced the initial info from the chicago landmarks website, mentioned NRHP listing dates where appropriate, added "see also" and "refereces" sections to each article, and added project banners (without importance, class, etc) on the talk pages. unfortunately, i didn't add references yet and not much is wikified, but i have plans to work on each of the articles over the next week, including adding references, adding more content, wikify, copy edit, etc. i'll also be adding public domain pics into the commons and into the articles, since most of what i have worked on has very old pics available. as time allows, i'll work to do at least 5 more redline articles on the list.
it is my opinion that we should have a stub article created for all redline articles before submission for review/comments about becoming a FL. just an opinion, but it may improve our chances of achieving FL status on the first try.
btw....this stubification effort could result in multiple DYK's if we can get others to participate (which may improve visibility of the project, not to mention viability) in the next few days, let me know what you think about what the best candidates may be. i am open to assisting in copy edit efforts before submission to DYK. LurkingInChicago 00:07, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
I "borrowed" some text from a very good source on the Club and put it on the talk page with a question about how much of it is appropriate to use. Could you take a look-see? Speciate 03:55, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, I never thought about doing another tree... I would like to but it seems like the Kennedys would be a huge task. I think I can do it, but it will take a while. 70.113.24.254 15:29, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Why did you remove the scroll box? If it was ever needed it is need on this article. TonyTheTiger 15:44, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
I had already supported, but I can make my support full if that'll alleviate your worries. Circeus 02:25, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Tony, awhile back we were attempting to create a template for each county, and to keep them pretty much the same across the board. Some people in the Chicago area didn't want to have a few of the templates in the Chicagoland area to be the same as the rest of the state. You can see the ones that are different at Wikipedia:WikiProject Illinois/Templates, plus the points of view on the talk page. This was something I shelved for the time being, but now that I am almost done with all the townships (only 15 more counties to go) I would like to have those counties changed. I wanted to run it by you first, but if you don't want to change that is fine.
The ones that I would like to get changed are DuPage County, Illinois, Kane County, Illinois, Kankakee County, Illinois, Kendall County, Illinois, Lake County, Illinois, and McHenry County, Illinois. Specifically I would like to remove "Points of Interest", "Higher Education", "Hospitals", and "Transportation" (other than airports), and move these to just the County page. Eventually I would like to convert I think to Template:US county navigation box as Sangamon County, Illinois has been done. What are your thoughts on all this as you head up the Chicago Project. Maybe this is something you will need to open up to your entire group. As it is, those templates do not match what is suppose to be the "standard" by the states. All the other IL counties simply need to change a few things.-- Kranar drogin 03:46, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Compton House is a stately home in the village of Over Compton, which is where the (limited amount of) info on that house is currently located (but one day I hope to expand it). If the Arthur H. Compton House is also likely to be looked up under the name Compton House, then I suggest that the Compton House entry should become a geodis page saying something like
Richard Pinch 17:22, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
i acted on your feedback. silly oversight on my part. i have a long wikifairy/wikignome document with all of my wiki favorite templates, categories, stubs, banners, etc. but in my excitement i forgot to use it. over the last two days i have worked on the articles i previously created (as have others) and all are in much better shape. i have also created new articles and project tagged a few random chi-related articles i ran across. a personal goal over the next week is to keep working on the landmark list to eliminate all redlinks. i'll start by creating the article for Commission on Chicago Landmarks. LurkingInChicago 22:51, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
... is up for AfD again. Robert K S 01:55, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for that. I have no clue why I labeled it as I did. -- Woohookitty Woohoo! 04:11, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Cool. I have voted for it. I don't know much about it either, but it seems it is the only one in Cook County. That dot map isn't totally complete though either, so if you didn't go through all the articles towards the bottom (he was working form the top down), there might be another down there.-- Kranar drogin 05:42, 30 June 2007 (UTC)