User talk:TonyTheTiger/Archive 11

Image:20070530 Miro - Miro's Chicago.JPG
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 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)

You may be able to help
See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Visual arts/Infoart articles. You're an art man! Any assistance welcome. Tyrenius 03:12, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Twas just a tiny misunderstanding
No problem! Some people at 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)

New Images
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: 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)


 * You guys have a class called "image", right? That is what I will plug in, and do with all the Chicago ones that are done so far (if they aren't done already).--Kranar drogin 23:09, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

SatyrBot and WP:Chicago
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:
 * 1) Remove the categories from the list that aren't 100% within the project scope.  That reduces the usefulness of that list, so that's not really optimal.
 * 2) Split the list into two sections - "Bot Run" and "Bot Ignore" (for example).  That reduces the reader-usability of the list, since those aren't sections people would be looking for or find useful.
 * 3) Add a tag  to the category pages that the bot should ignore.  That's probably the best solution, but I'll leave it up to you.

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)

J. R. Richard FAC
See 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)

Image:20060627 Trump Plaza et al from Atlantic City Expressway.JPG
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 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 Media copyright questions with any questions you may have. Thank you. Aksibot 07:51, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:20060627 Trump Plaza from Atlantic City Expressway.JPG
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 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 Media copyright questions with any questions you may have. Thank you. Aksibot 07:51, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:20070520_Lifesize_Darth_Vader_at_Lego_Store.JPG
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:20070520_Lifesize_Darth_Vader_at_Lego_Store.JPG, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at Possibly unfree images if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. MECU ≈ talk 22:26, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Objections at JR Richard FAC
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)
 * Could you please copyedit J. R. Richard. You said you could see many more corrections needing to be made, and I think it would greatly help the situation if you could copyedit the article. Thanks, Nishkid64 (talk) 19:17, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate images uploaded
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)

Monet (Haystacks)
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)

Emil Bach House
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. Thanks. IvoShandor 08:23, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Figured it out, a couple of my refs that I hadn't found yet when I posted that pointed it out. Check out the article anyway. I added several to the new articles page for Chicago WP. All of the articles I have written lately have been DYK or have been nominated for DYK and are pending except for Peter A. Beachy House which wasn't long enough because the book I am waiting for hasn't arrived yet. IvoShandor 11:21, 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)


 * I tweeked that sentence you pointed out, btw the infobox adds Category:Historic district contributing properties, no need to add it to articles with "cp" parameter set in the box. Just FYI. IvoShandor 15:59, 5 June 2007 (UTC)


 * More pointless blathering from me. I much prefer the way I did Central Park West Historic District for district articles, I just separated the list and that one is comprehensive. IvoShandor 16:02, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Renaming templates
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.  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  09:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Block 37 / you are beautiful
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

J. R. Richard
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)
 * It seems like all three are backlogged. I'll ask user:Awadewit (he did great work coypediting Samuel Adams during FAC) to take a look at it. Nishkid64 (talk) 00:42, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Generally-re:architecture
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)

Image-Class Chicago articles
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)
 * I'm not sure why images that already have "class=image" don't show up in the category. I think it might be that if I edit a template, the category changes implied by the template don't get done unless something is edited on the articles that include the template.  I edited Image talk:20070605 South McCormick Court Fountains.JPG to include the "importance" parameter, and suddenly it showed up in the category.  Otherwise, your guess is as good as mine as to why they don't go into the category right away, even though bringing up the appropriate image talk page says very clearly that they're in the Image-Class category.  --Elkman (Elkspeak) 18:42, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I think you might need to find a template expert to figure out why these images don't get placed into the category automatically. I'm not a template expert, though I've been able to get things done with this template so far.  You might want to ask at the help desk.  Alternatively, you could use AutoWikiBrowser to do null edits on each of the image talk pages that transclude ChicagoWikiProject as a hack to get them to show up in the category.  I could do that later on this evening if you don't have AWB, but at the moment I'm at work trying to figure out some thorny problems.  --Elkman (Elkspeak) 19:06, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and AWB-ed through all the articles that had ChicagoWikiProject in the Image talk: namespace. Some of them didn't have "class=Image" in the template, while others had it in lower case (although that shouldn't matter, in theory).  In any case, they should show up now.  --Elkman (Elkspeak) 20:48, 8 June 2007 (UTC)



Your GA nomination of Douglas Park (Chicago)
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)


 * I will review this article again tomorrow (June 10), and if it looks okay then it will pass. If not corrected, I'll alert you so that you may make any changes necessary. GrooveDog 17:10, 9 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Congratulations Tony - my reading of it did not see any problems at GA level either - and I see that it has passed. Well done to all.-- VS  talk 22:27, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Harold Washington Cultural Center
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)

Blackstone Hotel
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)


 * Eh. Not a big deal. I will check out your question. IvoShandor 17:29, 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)

WP:Chi checkup
I'm glad you asked. The bot ran - see 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 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)


 * Found the bug. I'm running the full WP:Chi check now. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs)  21:47, 11 June 2007 (UTC)


 * The full run has been completed. It will run every Thursday morning (I think it's 04:00 UTC?).  The project list is something I put together manually while the project is running - since this is an ongoing thing, I won't be copying the logs there.  You can either check the User:SatyrBot/Logs (which I empty out periodically) or Special:Contributions/SatyrBot.  And do let me know if it doesn't seem to be working or anything - once it's automated, I tend not to check it. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs)  00:18, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Campbell's Soup Cans
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)

Return to Wikipedia and WPChi
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)

Allerton Hotel
I can add the citations, but not for at least a week. Shsilver 01:26, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Citation format
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)

CBOT Peer Review
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)

Duplicate images uploaded
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)

Rockford, Illinois
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 if you would be so kind.--Kranar drogin 22:04, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

J. R. Richard FAC
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)

Thanks
For the condolences and the barnstar. I like shiny. : ) IvoShandor 11:35, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * It's funny, I totally saw the four barnstars on the Chicago flag as the regular red stars until about the fifth time I looked at it. : ) IvoShandor 11:51, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

And also . ..
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, Kingmaker
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)

Re: Haystacks (Monet) Peer Review
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)


 * The question as to why no automated peer reviews have been performed for the last month or so would be better handled by the individuals that are involved in running them (User:AZPR and User:Ruhrfisch). I have no idea why they have stopped doing them. --Allen3 talk 11:42, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Pics
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)


 * While not explicitly against it both guidelines and policy recommend against galleries. They don't really add much anyway. Read this policy and this guideline. Your free to do what you want but in my opinion large galleries detract from the article and I seriously doubt they would survive at FA or GA. The MOS certainly doesn't specifically endorese them. IvoShandor 16:41, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * This part of the MOS on images: Use Commons to link to more images on Commons, wherever possible. It does say to use galleries for too many images and then it recommends the above.


 * The best reason I can think of to move your images to Commons (and if you do this they are available here the same as if you ul them here) is since you are freely licensing your contributions anyway making them available on Commons only helps out. It allows all of the other language Wikipedias to use the images and easily find them. So when Portugeuse or whatever language wiki wants to translate something like Magnificent Mile they can include the images too. Just my opinion, do what you want with the galleries (though my recommendation and viewpoint still stands) but the images should definitely be moved to Commons, my guess is that if you don't someone else will so it doesn't matter really. But if you just add them to Commons in the first place it sure does save a lot of work later for someone else. Also I started taking a look at Blackstone Hotel. IvoShandor 17:22, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Another arguement against including galleries, or too many pictures in general, is the long load times. Much of the world still accesses the Wiki via dialup. Long load times for pages because of large galleries and the like are very frustrating for the reader. IvoShandor 20:43, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * The answer would be yes: here is what Kranar drogin posted on my talk page (in case you missed it)

''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)

Not all NRHPs are architecture
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)

Re Two Questions
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 &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 23:18, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I was bold and added the dot picture to the 333 North Michigan article - I had to adjust it as the example above is 200 pixels wide and in the article it was only 150 pixels wide (so if the image size is adjusted, the dot will have to be moved too). I will work on the PR backlog over the next several days. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 00:41, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Trump International Hotel and Tower (Chicago)
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)


 * Haha, I knew you would mention the number of images in the Chicago Spire article :). A new article has been written for the Chicago Spire.  I'll be posting it as soon as actual construction starts on the Spire.  Feel free to have a look at it and make changes - it's located at User:Chupper/Sandbox04.  Considering the amount of prose on that sandbox article, you'll notice that the image count is way down and I probably need to bring some more pictures into it.
 * To get the Trump Chicago article to GA status we'll at least need a lot more prose and additional references. In addition I'll be restoring all those pictures back into the gallery section and maybe 1 or 2 into the main article.  Considering WP:MOS and the consensus already established, I realized I removed those images in error.  If you want to, go ahead and add those pictures back in.  I probably won't be able to get around to it until next week because I'm drowning in finals right now.  Chupper 12:31, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

People from Chicago
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)


 * I'm not seeing it a lot in other cities, but the sorting is there. Currently, as of this moment, here are the sub-cats for People from Chicago:
 * Category:Actors from Chicago
 * Category:Chicago Outfit mobsters
 * Category:Chicago baseball players
 * Category:Chicago golfers
 * Category:Chicago musicians
 * Category:Chicago politicians
 * Category:Chicago writers
 * Category:Fictional Chicagoans
 * Category:Jews and Judaism in Chicago
 * Category:Michael Jordan
 * I created two of them, cause I figured that they will be fleshed out more (and with like 8 or so pages of people, it is a good chance). What I am proposing is changing for example:
 * Chicago writers => Writers from Chicago
 * Chicago politicians => Politicians from Chicago
 * And so on and so on. Then do some other expansion for some other cats. Does this explain a little better for you? If you don't want me to sort through all these people and get it a bit more organized I won't. I was just volunteering is all since I am almost done with "People of Illinois in the American Civil War", making sure they have what county or city each person is from along with the proper projects.--Kranar drogin 22:24, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, so that Second City category, you want me to put cats in for the people that are from Chicago, correct? Mike I see has no mention of Chicago in his article at all, just an FYI. And when I put Mike in Actors from Chicago, you want it so he doesn't get lost among all the others? Hmm, I suppose I could put a * in after his cat like *, and that would put him right at the front. Also, you have no problem with me having an Admin rename those cats as I talked about above? --Kranar drogin 23:07, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Colbert
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)


 * In that case, I suppose I should thank you for the gentle push. :) I'll double check on the various reviews it's been though, although all of those came up before I left, so I believe I addressed a lot of them -- there may have been some of backsliding, I don't know. I wouldn't mind putting in through the nom process in a couple of days. I didn't feel it was ready the first time, but it's probably very close to it now. Agree? -- Bailey(talk)  17:53, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'll drop you a line late tonight or early tommorrow morning. -- Bailey(talk) 18:06, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Ukrainian village entry
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)

Re: Template:Infobox MLB player
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)

Crown Fountain
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)

Assessment
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:


 * The church is featured in a key part of Nelson Algren's Never Come Morning which merited its inclusion in the Nelson Algren section of the guide to Literary Chicago by Greg Holden


 * It was the site of the first visit of the first democratically elected Prime Minister of Poland to Chicago (the largest Polish city outside of Poland) right after the fall of the communist government who was also a leader of Solidarity


 * It was featured in two films, among them one starring John Candy


 * The church's main altar, as well as its matching two side altars reputedly originate from the 1893 World's Columbian Exposition of the legendary 'White City' fame


 * In 2003, work was completed on a replica of the Veit Stoss Altar. Carved by artist Michał Batkiewicz over an eight year period, this imposing one-third scale copy is the largest and most detailed of work of its kind.


 * It was featured in a number of books on Chicago architecture, most notably "The AIA Guide to Chicago" by Alice Sinkevitch (Harvest Books 2004)


 * St. John Cantius is also found in a number of books on church architecture, among them "Heavenly City: The Architectural Tradition of Catholic Chicago" by Denis R. McNamara (Liturgy Training Publications 2005)and "The Archdiocese of Chicago: A Journey of Faith" by Edward R. Kantowicz (Booklink 2007).


 * The church is included in the itinerary of a number of Chicago area tours http://www.accentingchicago.com/tours.html "Polish Spires and Steeples Tour" http://www.chicagoneighborhoodtours.com/specialInterest/index.html 'Polish Chicago Tour".

Is this really a low importance stub? --Orestek 05:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Category Name Changing
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)


 * Also, how did you set up that Chicago Category page, just by hand? That would be nice to have a bot to monitor a page for Illinois also.--Kranar drogin 11:27, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Links
the articles are:

St. Stanislaus Kostka in Chicago St. Mary of the Angels in Chicago

enjoy! --Orestek 08:45, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

CBOT comments at WP:PR
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)

Haystacks
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)

Quick reply
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)


 * Tony: I would note that I really don't think Gloria has it out for you, though I can see how it might be interpreted that way. While I have agreed in the past that some of the articles from our project might not have met the GA criteria when listed I don't on this particular one (Chicago Theatre), surely there is some room for improvement and it looks like it is going to be relisted. In that instance I would treat Gloria's comments as an unsolicited peer review, which is always nice. And of course, I am still working on Blackstone Hotel, I think I will go look at it now. If you ever do want some help or peer reviews on stuff let me know. IvoShandor 19:09, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I will take a look at CBOT Building when I get a shot. As for Chris Young, I am a baseball fan too. I will take a look at it sometime if you'd like. : ) IvoShandor 06:33, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Symbol for Chi Theatre
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)

Martz
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)
 * Alright I'll consent to that, I don't necessarily want the article deleted I see a need for more evidence of Martz's notability weather its web based sources or not.- thank you Astuishin (talk) 04:19, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Barrett
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)

Cook County Unincorporated Communities
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)


 * Well, it kinda explains it a bit better for me. I just won't include them on the list. Also, I just found The Palmer House that may need some cleaning up for ya.--Kranar drogin 11:01, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Chicago Theatre GA/R
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)

Re: high importance fix needed
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)
 * Re AcreandHectare: There is nothing wrong with this template. A break and a space were actually present in the article itself; I have just fixed that.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:57, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Too many citations?
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.


 * Reference 1: cited 8 times.
 * Reference 16: cited 9 times.
 * Reference 24: cited 15 times.
 * Reference 44: cited 13 times.

Now here are the similar references I've spotted, followed by how many references I think are necessary:
 * References 97-103: 2

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:
 * "Young was overshadowed by teammate Jake Peavy (4-0, 0.79 ERA) for the National League Pitcher of the Month in a month where teammate Trevor Hoffman (0.00 ERA, 11 saves) was also a contender.[94]"
 * "...when the Cubs travelled to play Young's former team the Texas Rangers, whose Sammy Sosa hit his 600th home run during the series against his former Cubs team"
 * "However, Carlos Zambrano continued his no hit bid into the 8th inning, but took the l-0 loss by surrendering a home run.[103]"
 * "Other Princeton baseball players who played in the major leagues include Moe Berg, Charlie Caldwell, and John Easton.[32] The other Ivy League players to have played for the Texas Rangers are Pete Broberg (Dartmouth College) and Doug Glanville (University of Pennsylvania).[24]"
 * Three other current and previous pitchers--Randy Johnson,[34] Andrew Sisco,[35] and Eric Hillman[36]--are also 6 ft 10 in (2.08 m). "
 * "This was the first Ranger 1-0 victory since August 25, 2000 against the Toronto Blue Jays,[43] a stretch of 669 games.[24]"
 * "The Padres are joined by the New York Mets, Colorado Rockies and Tampa Bay Devil Rays as the only franchises who have never pitched no-hitters.[62]"
 * "Allie Reynolds is the only other pitcher to go twenty-five road starts without a loss.[57] Reynolds' twenty-five game streak spanned the 1948 and 1949 seasons.[3]" (is that Reference 3 again? From 57 to 3?
 * "last of the nine other pitchers to go twenty consecutive road starts without a loss was Greg Maddux who went twenty-two starts without a loss during the 1997 and 1998.[85]"

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]"


 * I believe this is far too much info to talk about one event. If it were me, I'd simply say that he traveled to Japan to participate in a baseball game against the Yomiuri Giants.  The last part, "He detailed visits with United States Ambassador to Japan Tom Schieffer, time in the Harajuku, and travels on the Bullet Train.[77]," seems too biographical for an encyclopedia.

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)

Top candidates at WP:CHI
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)

Stubby McList
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)
 * Well, you never know, I could get really bored one night and stub twenty of 'em, not likely but not impossible either. About how many did you say need to be stubbed out to meet the FL minimum? IvoShandor 20:05, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * You sound about as frusterated as I can be with the Illinois group. Personally Tony, I try and stay away from Chicago so I can focus on the rest of the state, including stubbing out Townships and Precincts in the south right now. Now, I know you guys are going to try for FL, so I am willing to give it a shot. I will look over the 20 min stub, but most of the time I make very basic ones. I'll get back to you, and see what I can come up with. Once I create them though, you or Ivo are going to have to look them over because once I get rolling with stubs, I usually don't stop.--Kranar drogin 22:43, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I was looking over the first one, and it seems that Adams House isn't on the NRHP or NHL. It seems it is only a Chicago Landmark. So if that is the case, do you still use Infobox_nrhp?--Kranar drogin 00:31, 26 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)
 * Alright, I have 14/50 you need done stubbed out so far. As I said, they are going to be very basic, but will have the info that is need to be "notable". I will work on more later after a break for a bit.--Kranar drogin 23:18, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I have noticed the edits you are doing, and updated my template. Sorry about all that extra work.--Kranar drogin 23:45, 26 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Alright, 32 stubs have been done today. I can do another 8-18 tomorrow and that should get you set with your list. One thing that once you get Featured with this list, is that I would like assistance with the list I have been creating List of protected areas of Illinois. Basically will need a good begining, and fill in the boxes with info, and prolly stub out the rivers, creeks, lakes, etc. Maybe you guys with chicago project, could work on getting the Chicagoland ones up to GA status. Ruhrfisch is taking care of the map, so don't worry about that. You don't have to help if you don't want, it is just something I would like to get done eventually. So, take a look through the 32 I have created. If you see things that need fixing, fix away, but they are there. Have a good one!--Kranar drogin 03:13, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


 * PS - Told you once I started rolling with stubs I will keep going!--Kranar drogin 03:14, 27 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)

WPChi slowdown
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)
 * The thing about collabarations is it has to be better than and more fun than doing it yourself. There are people doing their own things all over the Chicago pages. They might resist being co-opted by the Project because then they will have to follow more rules (whereas if they just create pages, they know we'll come in and doing the boring work of adding categories etc.).


 * And then there is the problem of not wanting to tread on people's toes. For example, I was thinking of rewriting the To Do list. Can I? I was thinking of tightening up the assessment scale, to make it less intimidating. Is that allowed? I don't know how to nominate a fact to "Did You Know?" which I think would bring traffic to our pages. I believe that more traffic to the pages will capture a few new editors to replace the ones that have faded away.


 * I feel limited by my ignorance. Many of the repetitive things we do could be done by bot, if only I knew how. I don't know how to create categories, and I have a couple in mind. I was thinking of making an effort to cross-list WPChi pages with other wikiprojects so that some more edits will get made, but don't know which is more likely to get their attention; tagging the article with one of their categories, the article with their stub tag, or the talk page with their banner. Many of those projects are moribund.


 * What I'm basically saying is; I don't know what to do, how to do it, if it will work, or if it is allowed. Speciate 03:25, 26 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi Tony thanks for your message and your support here Once the process there is finished - if I am lucky, I will be able to move my name up to here. Either way you can be assured of my continuing assistance and I will most certainly help with stub creation.  Keep up the great work - even when at times things seem a bit disheartening things will pick up again as old and new editors come back and forth to the project.-- VS  talk 05:33, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Fort King Site (landmarks page)
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)
 * Let me try again. The List of Chicago Landmarks page includes the "Fort King Site" under National Historic Landmarks not designated Chicago Landmarks. However, as far as I can tell, there does not appear to be any such place in Chicago. Indeed, I believe that the NHL entry for the Fort King Site is erronously titled.  It looks like they're actually describing the Robert Abbott House (which is in Chicago), rather than any sort of fort. Do you think I'm right, or is there a Fort King site in Chicago? Zagalejo 01:31, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * That would certainly explain things a lot better, just to chime in. I bet you're right. Those NPS databases are filled with errors, they're usually much easier to catch, simple things like address. IvoShandor 01:55, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * That's the impression I got as well. I did a search of the National Historic Landmarks database for "Fort King" and got two listings: one in Ocala, Florida (which appears correct), and one in Chicago (which looks like it has the wrong title).  As far as I can tell, his house isn't a Chicago Landmark, though the building where the Chicago Defender was published is a Chicago Landmark, as part of the Black Metropolis-Bronzeville Historic District.  --Elkman (Elkspeak) 13:32, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Comment copied from Kranar's talk page
Response copied to Kranar drogin's talk page too-Just a few comments, because this discussion is one that I feel like commenting on :-)
 * I too have had some conflicts with the Architecture Project (I am a member) about talk page tags and have come across varying opinions. I even brought it up on the talk page of the project after I saw the comment about it on your page. The discussion is currently ongoing amongst architects and architecture buffs. For now, at least with places listed as Registered Historic Places or Chicago Landmarks just go by why they were designated landmarks or listed on the Register. If its for their architectural significance or merit include the Architecture Project tag on the talk page, if that isn't one of the reasons don't include it.
 * Alphabetical cats: I have also known this for sometime but prefer to let someone else or a bot do that stuff (bots do come along sometimes and do it).
 * I am very wishy washy how I link place names (though I try to be consistent). Sometimes I link a place like this: Oak Park, Illinois and other times like so: Oak Park, Illinois. I don't know if the MOS says anything about it, perhaps I will look it up.

That is all for now folks. IvoShandor 14:52, 26 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I am going to continue our discussion here since Tony is heading this up. Ok, first off. This is an international encyclopedia, so you must include the USA. That is what I was told from the begining, so that is what I have been doing (excluding my first entry). I always seperate city, state, nation as you will see in my second attempt here Eighth Church of Christ, Scientist. Since I am in no way part of the Architecture Project and really don't want to cause any hardship with them, I am not going to include their project in the Talk Page. Maybe that isn't very nice, but I would rather not do it for now. If you would like to include their tags later one, we can do that. So, now that you see my second entry, I am going to continue on. I will post all my articles when I am done for the night if you don't mind.--Kranar drogin 21:31, 26 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I always include the United States but lately I have come to the opinion that actually linking it adds nothing to the article other than a pointless link. I sincerely doubt that anyone who reads the Wiki doesn't know what the United States is and if they don't it's a few keystrokes away. Let me know what you do, I can look at them to see if Archtecture tags should be added. IvoShandor 05:33, 28 June 2007 (UTC)


 * All articles have been added to the Chicago project page. I think I have done like 50 or so. Going to finish up the houses and then I think I will call it quits so I can get back to stubbing out the townships and precints in the south.--Kranar drogin 10:30, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikiproject Chicago
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, JetLover 21:09, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Same here -- I seem to have ended up on a list of notification recipients, apparently because of a single categorization edit that I made to an article about a building in Chicago several weeks ago. Could I be removed please?  People edit articles for all kinds of reasons; perhaps the updates might be limited to those who have expressed interest in the project on the project's page?  Thanks, and best wishes with the project. --Malepheasant 22:38, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

stubification effort for Chicago Landmark
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)

Arts Club of Chicago
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)

Kennedy family tree
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)

Re: Scrollbox
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)


 * See Template:Scroll box, which includes the following message:


 * Warning: This template should not be used in main article space, as it renders any content obscured within the template unprintable. This is especially true with text content, such as citations, according to a June 2007 discussion.


 * The deletion dicussison linked to shows a clear consensus that references should not be contained in a scrolling box, as a template that did just that was deleted – Gurch 15:52, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Chicago Landmark FLC
I had already supported, but I can make my support full if that'll alleviate your worries. Circeus 02:25, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I have nothing to say really about the templating, except that the "none" bits I find totally superfluous. And thanks for removing that anon comment. I thought I had. Circeus 16:17, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I was referring to the personal attack, which happened to be an unsigned anon comment. Circeus 16:26, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Nevermind. I missed an intermediate edit by User:Fvasconcellos. Circeus 16:36, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Chicagoland Counties
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 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
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


 * Compton House may refer to
 * The Arthur H. Compton House in Chicago, Illinois
 * Compton House, a mansion in Over Compton, Dorset
 * Compton Verney House, a mansion in Compton Verney, Warwickshire
 * Compton Beauchamp House, a mansion in Compton Beauchamp, Oxfordshire

Richard Pinch 17:22, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

a better stubification effort
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)
 * i now have a stub created for the Commission on Chicago Landmarks. not that i really like to create stubs, but i'm surprised others haven't created this article.  i'll be expanding and referencing this weekend, but before i or others go much further with major content i would appreciate your opinion or editing efforts on the following:
 * 1) where to put the "for more information see Commission on Chicago Landmarks in the landmark list article?
 * 2) what should be removed from the Chicago Landmark article and placed here? what should be duplicated?  or be paraphrased in short to the commission article?  vice versa?  i believe some form of the criteria should be in both articles.
 * 3) how to best focus the content of the commision article on the function of the commission vs. having too much content focused on the actual landmarks.
 * 4) other, etc LurkingInChicago

Jeopardy! in popular culture
...is up for AfD again. Robert K S 01:55, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Incorrectly labeled closing
Thanks for that. I have no clue why I labeled it as I did. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 04:11, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Re:William W. Powers State Recreation Area
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)