Talk:Washington Park (Chicago park)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article Washington Park (Chicago park) has been listed as one of the Everyday life good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
February 3, 2007 Good article nominee Listed
This article is a former Chicago Collaboration of the Week. Every week, a Chicago-related article that is in need of substantial improvement is selected to be the Chicago COTW. Visit CHICOTW to nominate and vote for future COTWs. This week's Chicago COTW is List of Chicago Landmarks update. Please help us improve it to a higher standard of quality. See the To Do List to suggest a change or to see a list of open tasks. See past CHICOTWs. Note our good articles.
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] Map

A map of the park would be a nice touch. Shsilver 21:48, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

The best I can do is what is in External links. TonyTheTiger 22:00, 27 December 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Gorgeous

This article is 1000% better. Sorry I'm not around to contribute more. Great job guys! TheQuandry 02:49, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA

Good article. One question:is it necessary to have a parenthetical "park" in the article title? Is there a Washington Park that I missed in the article that is not a park in Chicago. Otherwise, well-written and referenced.Reddyrov

Scratch that. I found it.Reddyrov

[edit] Requested move

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it to be moved.--Stemonitis 14:12, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.


Washington Park (Chicago park) → Washington Park, Chicago (park) — Page was moved from this name without discussion. This name conforms to other park names (see for example Washington Park (disambiguation)). TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 02:54, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Add  # '''Support'''  or  # '''Oppose'''  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.

[edit] Survey - in support of the move

  1. Support I believe that the page move was an incorrect one. I believe the page name should follow the convention at given the general convention at Washington Park (disambiguation) for community areas and parks. The page should be returned to Washington Park, Chicago (park), which is now a redirect. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 02:46, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. Support Move it back for the sake of consistency with the other Washington Park pages at the disambig page. It's just better that way. TheQuandry 04:12, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey - in opposition to the move

  1. Oppose There's a fairly strong established practice of putting the city in parentheses for parks which need disambiguation; see Category:Parks in Manhattan, and more generally Category:Parks in the United States, for examples. It also helps readers distinguish between neighborhoods named Washington Park (which use a comma) and parks having the same name (which would use parentheses). MisfitToys 02:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Reply Category:Parks in the United States is in your favor 3-2, Category:Parks in Chicago is 4-4 excluding the one in question and Category:Parks in Manhattan is 7-1 in your favor. You may be right. I will see where consensus goes. There may be an applicable policy page that someone knows about. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 03:05, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
  1. Oppose - the "name, city" form is completely nonstandard. --Yath 04:30, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. Oppose - Per Yath and MisfitToys, the park should follow conventions of other parks where possible. There could be naming conventions of some sort at WikiProject Protected Areas that could possibly be transferred to regular old parks. Nearly every specific locale, that needs a more descriptive title, seems to follow the convention which puts the place name in the parenthetical.A mcmurray (talk • contribs) 04:44, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments:


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.