Talk:Winnetka, Illinois

Education

Can anyone add more info about Sacred Heart and Faith Hope? Thanks! Qslack 05:56, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Donald Rumsfeld lived in Winnetka long after his childhood.

I thought that Tom Cruise was born in New York??

Vandalism

There is far too much vandalism on this page. The "Famous Winnetkans" section is being heavily vandalizied. You can check the archives of this page, it's the same person every time. I keep deleting them, but something should be done. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SinHarvest (talk • contribs) 22:52, 22 March 2007 (UTC).

Martin Luther King Plaque

Well, it has now been installed, I will check the article and see that it reflects it. (It already does...) N9jig (talk) 11:07, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

I might be making a mountain out a mole-hill here, but I changed it from "will be" to "is going to be" because there really is no set time for it to go up, and there are indeed complications behind the matter which might not have it be erected for quite a while...I just changed it to give it a little bit of uncertainty timewise. I'll probably change that phrase as progress is made. but hey, if you think what i'm doing is wrong, say so. that's why it's a discussion page.

Unverified Information Cutdown

Most of the factual statements in this article are unverified (lacking citations) and have been that way for years; it's probably not illogical to assume that some such statements have been sitting there since the article's creation itself. While header tags like {unverified} and in-line tags like {fact} are indicators to this problem, they do not by any means rectify it--a common misinterpretation I see in many articles here on Wikipedia. People see an unverified statement and, not wanting to delete it in the event that it's actually correct, slap a tag on it and then walk away. The problem occurs when the person doesn't come back however much time later and deletes the statement after giving other editors sufficient time to try to get some research (preferably, the tagger would've also done some research himself). While I don't enjoy mass deletions of other people's hard work, these unverified claims have been here for a really long time. We wouldn't want people reading about Winnetka, IL to get false impressions. I've tried to look for citations for some of the facts stated here, but some of them are so obscure that there's no sources available. Therefore, I'm proposing a cutdown per WP:VERIFY--if we cannot find sources for the unverified information by the end of the this month (March), then I personally will delete the questionable information that is unverified. Questionable information (i.e. information that requires sources) is defined by WP:V as "...any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, and for all quotations." Specifically, I'm challenging the entire "History" and "In film" sections, since those two most blatantly exhibit a lack of citations, especially given the attractiveness of the information. If anyone else would like to challenge any statement(s) or section(s) to be deleted at the end of the month or otherwise argue against this proposition, please do so here. Cervantes de Leon (talk) 22:21, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Found where the author of the first paragraph of the History section got his or her info here. Don't know why s/he didn't bother to add the citation. Cervantes de Leon (talk) 01:29, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Since this source is published by the Village of Winnetka itself and furthermore is not one that's been particularly subjected to any expert review, I checked WP:IRS to see if it could be considered reliable: "Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as: the material is not unduly self-serving; it does not involve claims about third parties; it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject; there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; the article is not based primarily on such sources." I emboldened the statements which are relevant to this source. As seen in the Winnetka, IL article itself, the source makes claims about the actions several people and one organization, the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad. I just checked the railroad's article and it makes no mention of Winnetka, IL. I'll be doing more research as the month goes on to see if I can dig up anything else. Cervantes de Leon (talk) 01:41, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

The railroad mentioned is the Chicago & Milwaukee RR, a predecessor of the C&NW, and eventually the Union Pacific. It was not the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific (Milwaukee Road). Similar names, different lines. The Milwaukee Road ran a few miles to the west, the CNW hugged the lake shore. N9jig (talk) 02:38, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul etc. railroad is the one that's linked to in the article itself when it mentions the railroad through Winnetka. Assuming your information is accurate, I'll correct that link. 24.15.197.87 (talk) 05:11, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Changed the linked railroad to Chicago and Milwaukee Railway, which seems to be the article on Wikipedia that's referring to what you were talking about. Note that I'm relying on your judgment and that there's still no citations in the entire section. Cervantes de Leon (talk) 05:15, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Actually Walter S. Gurnee was a director of the predecessor of the Milwaukee Road, the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul (See http://www.gurnee.il.us/history/history_namesake.html). There is a reference on pne page that Mr. Gurnee was a president or officer of the North Shore Line, but that is incorrect.

The Chicago & Milwaukee, which ran thru Winnetka, became the C&NW and eventually was merged into Union Pacific, is a different railroad than the Gurnee led Milwaukee Road. Even though Mr. Gurnee may have lived in Winnetka, the Milwaukee Road of which he was affiliated never came to Winnetka. I will edit the article and see if it can be cleared up a bit. N9jig (talk) 12:06, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up; the source didn't make any mention of an actual railroad, only the two names of executives (Gurnee and that other one). All of the things you added to the section will eventually need citations, but those can wait--with what you've said so far, it sounds like you know what you're talking about when it comes to railroads on the North Shore. I'm more concerned with the other parts of the History section--those mentioning an Erastus Patterson, the dates of the town's incorporation, and so forth. What's your opinion on the reliability of the one source, considering my argument above? I'd like another view before I wipe the slate of everything pulled from here that's been sitting in the article for years. I'm still looking for other sources online to confirm the statements. Cervantes de Leon (talk) 20:54, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

I think I've found out where the Winnetka article got all this stuff about an Erastus Patterson: a book, written by a Lora Townsend Dickinson, who apparently moved to Winnetka who-knows-how-long-ago, thought it was the most beautiful place on Earth, and wrote a book about it: see here and here. Other web pages (for example, this one, but notably not the Winnetka page itself) use the book as part of their bibliographies. As far as I understand, not only the data concerning the Patterson family but literally everything of Winnetka's history is pulled from this one book. Thus, the question arises if the book itself can be considered a source. I don't have a hard copy, and I can't find any complete copies online, so I don't know if the book itself has any citations. Thus, the source could be considered "questionable", at which point it applies to the above wikipedia policy statement I rattled off earlier: "...Questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as: the material is not unduly self-serving; it does not involve claims about third parties; it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject; there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; the article is not based primarily on such sources." This Dickinson source seems to violate almost every component of that policy:

• From what information I have obtained, the book makes no mention of anything negative about the town of Winnetka, probably because the person writing the book was doing so in attempt to show how lovely of a place Winnetka was.
• The book does make claims about third parties, namely the railroad group mentioned above as well as the Patterson family.
• There is a reasonable doubt as to the book's authenticity, since no evidence has been acquired thus far that the book contains citations.
• The article is primarily based on this source, since, as I stated earlier, everything about the history of Winnetka is primarily based on this source.

However, the fact that other people are using this as a citation makes me wary. I'm not going to come to a final verdict as to whether or not this source is good or not too quickly; I would hope that I could get some other peoples' opinions. 192.83.228.119 (talk) 17:49, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I have a copy of L. T. Dickinsons book (no ISBN, it was written well before them!), it was written with approval and assistance of the Winnetka Historical Society, a well established organization of which Dickinson was a member. The book was copyrighted in 1956, the author having lived in Winnetka for over 40 years at the time, her husband was the Village Attorney for most of that time. There is also a 4 page bibliography included in the book and it is well indexed. As a 25 year employee of the village I know that this book is well regarded as a source of historic information on the Village and is referred to often. I think we can declare it a reliable source. N9jig (talk) 21:55, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I suppose at this point it would be better overall if we assumed it were a valid source. More information will be preserved that way. We should find some way to cite this Wikipedia article with that book, but beyond that, I think we've come to the heart of it. Even though it's almost the end of the month, I still haven't done much looking into the "In Film" section of this article, so I'll spend a bit more time on that--as well as the other sections--before I go ahead with this "cutdown." We sometimes forget that the goal of Wikipedia articles is to make them better, not worse; perhaps calling this process a "cutdown" put the accent on the wrong syllable, so to speak. Cervantes de Leon (talk) 01:34, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Neutrality in Geography>Northern Boundary

Perhaps a better choice of words could be used here to have less bias, particularly the word "Forcing" this could be at least changed to "requiring". Gamerwierdo100 (talk) 13:11, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Junglegym

The history section should include at least a mention of Jungle gyms. 2600:6C67:1C00:5F7E:51B3:D2CF:DE31:6A1C (talk) 17:17, 24 October 2023 (UTC)