Talk:List of alumni of the Second City

Fair use rationale for Image:SecCity.jpg
Image:SecCity.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 12:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Does List of Second City Chicago alumni duplicate the first section?
Does List of Second City Chicago alumni duplicate the first section, or is that article only comedians, whereas this includes others?

Should main or See also be added, or should they be merged?

Mark Hurd (talk) 12:45, 17 February 2011 (UTC)


 * The two lists don't seem to have any distinct inclusion criteria, so it's just duplication. There could be a case to be made that the Chicago company has the notability and volume needed to stand alone as an independent list, but we don't need both a standalone Chicago list and a Chicago section in this list — if the separate list is desired, then the Chicago section of this list should be pruned down to a main link to that one instead of directly listing people. But it's also worth noting that if Chicago qualifies for a separate standalone list, then Toronto absolutely does too — but with just 14 people listed under the Detroit, Las Vegas and Cleveland sections combined, this list loses its reason for being if Chicago and Toronto are spun out, so I don't believe we really need the separate Chicago list either. Accordingly I've tagged them for a proposed merger. Bearcat (talk) 20:13, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

And, for that matter, instead of having distinct city sections — which requires some people to get listed twice because they did stints in both Chicago and Toronto, and is confusing in its chronological ordering — I'd actually prefer to see this reorganized into an alphabetical list in the following format (I've just picked a couple of random performers as a demonstration):

Alternatively, instead of a single "cities" column, we could also have a "checkbox" column for each individual city which had a Second City company, and then place in the appropriate column for each performer. But the list should still be alphabetical in order rather than the current format. And the list should not include additional links to other projects that the performer was involved in after being in Second City — that information is already available from the performer's standalone BLP anyway, so it's not necessary to repeat it all here. Bearcat (talk) 00:43, 31 January 2015 (UTC)