Reader creates Wikipedia El station articles
Here's an email from a reader:
Hello there! I'm a not-long reader of the CTA Tattler and a not-long resident of Chicago (month and a half). Because of my somewhat autistic nature, I managed to create a Wikipedia article for every 'L' station. That exists. It took a while, but it's done.
However, I am no omniscient 'L' rider. I have my stop, 35-Bronzeville-IIT, and I know Roosevelt pretty well too, but I'm not a big expert on the other stations. As such, some of the articles are really, really short and offer no real information at all. Because of this, I'd like to invite you and your readers to edit Wikipedia and get some information onto these station articles.
I'd love it if you guys could visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_stations_on_the_Chicago_%27L%27 , find your favorite station(s), and get some info and, if you're willing to release pictures under a free license, pictures out there. I must stress, though, no direct copying-and-pasting; these have to be original work due to copyright issues. As well, no "Monroe/State sucks!" (even though it does); we must strive to be objective and verifiable.
This would really help Wikipedia, and help get some station info out in an easy to find place. Thanks a million, and keep the CTA stories coming.
Casey, a.k.a. BorgHunter
-- OK, this is Kevin here. Casey makes a great effort here, but he does need some help. He admits he doesn't know it all (how refreshing), so let's help him out.
Have you checked out http://chicago-l.org? It has extensive stations info and pictures.
Posted by: David | October 17, 2006 at 07:40 AM
I think each station should also get a Creep Factor rating.
Posted by: guest | October 17, 2006 at 09:37 AM
Wow... that's pretty impressive.
Posted by: Tovi | October 17, 2006 at 09:38 AM
The information for the Francisco station is slightly out-dated. It's been demolished. I'll try to get you a picture sometime this week.
Posted by: Cheryl | October 17, 2006 at 09:56 AM
Love the creep o meter suggestion. Made me smile. I'd also like to see a probability chart that measures the likelihood of getting a seat on the a.m. rush hour trains. The fact that my Brown line stop was constructed 687 years ago is cool and stuff - but am I going to get a seat and will the person next to me be smelly and look at me is the sort of info I can use too.
Posted by: Jeff | October 17, 2006 at 10:18 AM
It appears he crosslinks to chicago-l.org for each station. The framework Casey layed out seems pretty thorough.
This kind of ultra-detailed and very niche information is slightly controversial on Wikipedia, from what I understand. At the same time, these ever deeper levels of detail are part of what drives Wikipedia forward. So who knows.
It would be cool to crosslink these articles with chicagocrimes.org -- it looks like the data is mostly there (there's a CTA location type, and if that was crossreferenced with street/block number it should be possible to get the crimes at a specific station). If it's not possible to do right now, definitely contact them to see if it can be added... hmm, contact links appear to be broken, this is the developer of that site: http://www.holovaty.com/
Posted by: Ian Bicking | October 17, 2006 at 02:34 PM
considering the fact that much of the information was taken from Chicago-L.org i find it kind of ... repetitive/unnecessary? i think it is good that it is put on Wikipedia, yet i feel there is much more info on chicago-l.org, which makes this kind of unnecessary.
i would however have to agree that there should be a creep factor rating, and things such as cross referencing crime statistics, etc., would be nice to be added.
and maybe adding significant news about each station? not trying to be insensitive whatsoever, but news such as the person being hit by the L at the Wellington station recently would be an example.
Posted by: adam | October 17, 2006 at 02:55 PM
One should not violate Chicago-L.org copyrights when doing this!! See http://www.chicago-l.org/legal.html#copyright for the copyright notice.
Posted by: jackonthebus | October 17, 2006 at 09:35 PM
jackonthebus, I don't see what copyrights are being violated. Facts are not copyright-able, and proper attribution is given in all cases where information was taken from chicago-l.org, as near as I can see from the articles that I looked at.
Posted by: Tom Brady | October 18, 2006 at 08:07 AM
Division Street Blue line updated.
Posted by: Mustang | October 18, 2006 at 11:03 AM
jackonthebus/Tom Brady: I do not believe copyright laws are being violated either. Primarily for the simple fact that Chicago-L.org is being cited as a source. However, Tom Brady, I do believe that whether or not they are facts, they can be copyright-able. I don't know the complete background/law on this, but if facts are compiled and combined with additional commentary only found in one place (on one website) I believe it is "copyright-able."
But, once again, I do not believe there would/could be any problem in terms of copyright-infringement when it comes to using information and citing the source on Wikipedia.
Posted by: adam | October 18, 2006 at 02:06 PM