Talk:Oak Creek, Wisconsin

Incorporation due to Zeidler

As anyone who's lived in the city knows, the incorporation was due specifically to fears of Oak Creek being annexed by the Zeidler administration. However, one user:OrangeMike seems determined to scrub this fact from the article for some reason. Putting this here to open discussion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.194.198.25 (talk) 00:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

With respect, an article on that controversy (or on Zeidler's administration in Milwaukee's article) would be a good place for that reference. Stating who initiated or proposed an annexation that ultimately caused this village to form is too much detail for the lead of an article. If there were a section here or elsewhere on the controversy, maybe that would work. In the lead, here, as it was, it's too close to POV, as it hints at a bias against Mr. Zeidler. Best, ZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 01:01, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I add that, technically, a municipality annexes as a legislative act. The administration cannot annex itself, nor can individuals. To state that anyone other than the City of Milwaukee enacted an annexation is incorrect. Best, ZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 01:03, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I must disagree, as one who lived through both Frank Zeidler and Lee "Out of Town" Brown's regimes.OakCreekGuy 01:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

You're right, the issue probably deserves mention. But here, in the lead of this article, it's not directly relevant to what Oak Creek, WI is and why it is notable - which is what the lead is supposed to do. It looks like there have been some reversions already, removing your text from the lead - so, it's possible that the consensus is for the version without the reference to Mr. Zeidler. Is there some alternative that would work? ZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 01:39, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Sikh temple

Please could someone who lives here take a photograph of the Sikh temple and upload it to Wikimedia Commons.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 12:51, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Oak Creek, Wisconsin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6HQu4Spqa to http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2012/SUB-EST2012.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130911234518/http://factfinder2.census.gov to http://factfinder2.census.gov
• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/64vfLAeJ2 to http://www.census.gov/geo/www/gazetteer/files/Gaz_places_national.txt

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:45, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Oak Creek Historical Society

The above-linked short and unreferenced article can fit into this municipality article. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 20:56, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Oppose - The Oak Creek Historical Society is a private organization unaffiliated with the municipality of Oak Creek. The article could be expanded and references added. 32.218.39.164 (talk) 23:08, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

There are no references and no evidence of notability; I could probably CFD it, but it is related to the municipality and a great many towns have sections on their historical societies. Add references and content or we should merge it to here until maybe enough is added, however unlikely that is. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 23:57, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Support merge, given the lack of independent notability. I agree with the proposer that a section for the historical society on the joint page would fit with the structure of other town or city pages. Klbrain (talk) 19:47, 21 July 2018 (UTC)