Talk:Grand Central Station (Chicago)

Before the station

Untitled

• Baltimore and Ohio Railroad
• Chicago Central Railroad
• Chicago and South-Western Railroad
• Built for Chicago and Great Western Railroad, Chicago and Northern Pacific Railroad, Wisconsin Central Railroad

• 1897: Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Chicago Central Railroad Chicago Great Western Railway Chicago and Northern Pacific Railroad Chicago and South-Western Railroad Wisconsin Central Railroad
• 1928: Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Baltimore and Ohio Chicago Terminal Railroad Chicago Great Western Railroad Minneapolis, St. Paul and Sault Ste. Marie Railway Pere Marquette Railroad

Info from A Guide to Chicago's Train Stations Present and Past by Ira J. Bach and Susan Wolfson

designed by Solon S. Beman, construction began October 1888 and formally opened December 8, 1890, headhouse was L-shaped, great clock tower, three huge arches to covered carraige court, built by WC at southwest corner of Wells and Harrison, demolished 1969 --SPUI (talk) 03:48, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Redundant Wikilinking

I'm of the opinion that wikilinking is hard to read, and redundant wikilinking, especially to the same page within the same paragraph, is unnecessary. To wit, I removed the most recent edit. However, I'd be happy if it was put back. I'm even happier that there are other people willing to work on this article! Gws57 01:45, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:BO EA 55.jpg

Image:BO EA 55.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

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

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

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:04, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Grand Central Station (Chicago) GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Grand Central Station (Chicago)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

Notified: WP:RR, WP:ILLINOIS, WP:CHICAGO, Gws57 (leading editor) next most leading editors SPUI and Lordkinbote are now inactive and were not notified.

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.

• There is no source given for the information in the last paragraph of Present day.
  • I had originally sourced this in an April 5 2008 edit. This was removed, but I just added it back.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:04, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
• The last sentence of that same same section: "The exact timing of the newly proposed development will most likely be a long-term project due to the current glut of newly constructed condos in the downtown market and the credit crisis in the U.S. as well" doesn't make sense. The exact timing ... will be a project? What does "current" mean? 2008? Which credit crisis?
  • Yes early 2008. I no longer have the source, but I presume the credit crises caused by tightening of the mortgage lending markets.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:07, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
• The first paragraph of The B&OCT Bascule Bridge is uncited.
  • I added a ref that shows it was built in the 1930s after the river was widened.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:15, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

--Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

A quick glance at the article causes me to notice that the articleis somewhat deficient in terms of citations. In terms of my personal standards for nominating an article for GAR, I probably would not have nominated the article. I certainly would not promote the article if it came to WP:GAC in its current state. I would probably describe it as a B-Class article. It is certainly possible that with a few {{fact}} tags I would classify it as C-Class. However, at GAR I have trouble supporting delisting. I only notice a few uncited paragraphs. However, it seems this was nominated as part of a GA sweeps. Thus, I believe it is probably below an agreed WP:GA standard. I am quite neutral on this nomination.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:54, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Just for clarification, this is not a community GAR that requires a vote; it is an individual sweeps review. The article will remain listed as a GA if the above issues are addressed. If they are not then it will be delisted, a decision that can be challenged at WP:GAR. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 02:08, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for adding citations. I'm closing this review as a keep. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 17:18, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Third Counterweight for B&OCT Bascule Bridge and the St. Charles Air Line Bridge?

There is a claim in the text that the the B&OCT Bascule Bridge and the St. Charles Air Line Bridge "share a common third counterweight between them". Not only is that dubious from a technical standpoint, but while looking on aerial views (available on the GoogleMaps and Bing) and other images available on the internet I found this to be actually not the case. I would kindly ask for a reference that supports this claim, or otherwise I will remove the claim. Tony Mach (talk) 08:39, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

One more thing: This lengthy technical description I found does not describe any shared counterweight, as far as I can see. (Instead it describes the B&OCT bridge having one counterweight, and the SCAL bridge having two counterweights – no where in that lengthy technical description is anything described that would resemble a "shared common counterweight" in an even remote way.)

If there is a shared common third counterweight described somewhere, I would kindly ask someone to point out to me the relevant passage(s). Tony Mach (talk) 09:04, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

I have removed the following section, as it completely unsupported by references (and as far as I can see unsupported by reality):

However, it was not dismantled and currently sits locked in the "open" position. Because they are bascule bridges, both the B&OCT and the Air Line bridges each have a counterweight of their own, and in this case, they share a common third counterweight between them. This design allowed them to operate in unison, with an operator from the B&OCT in charge of operating both bridges. This has led to a curious historical oddity, as the CSX, successor railroad to the B&O, owns a bridge that it cannot abandon, because the bridge is needed to continue operating a second bridge it does not own.

Tony Mach (talk) 09:25, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

You should have read the references more carefully. The HAER reference here, already included in the article (as reference #37 at the time of this writing) specifically mentions the shared, third counterweight on page 3. oknazevad (talk) 13:41, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Grand Central Station (Chicago). 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 {{dead link}} tag to http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/pictures%5C1606%5Ccopmarefys.jpg
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140203111641/http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pnp/habshaer/il/il0600/il0633/data/il0633data.pdf to http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pnp/habshaer/il/il0600/il0633/data/il0633data.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 03:40, 24 March 2017 (UTC)