Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:27, 26 March 2013

Illinois Start‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chicago Start‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Boy, is this article ever POV.

This article must have been written by a Republican, or at least someone who really loathes Richard M. Daley. Jhobson1 (talk) 17:48, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Incidentally, why is there no mention of the Shakman Decrees, which did so much to reduce the power of the machine? Jhobson1 (talk) 15:00, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

GS, what do you think of Jhobson1's comments above? Hugh (talk) 17:36, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

What is your opinion of the neutrality of this article today? Hugh (talk) 15:42, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

The article mentions the Shakman Decrees. I would note that there's no article about the Shakman Decrees. How about that... another article you can write. As for the comments about Republicans and hating Daley, I don't care to go back in the history and see what the article looked like in 2008. Although Misplaced Pages is a large place and most of the articles here need work and this one is no different. The Garbage Skow (talk) 04:29, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Do you think this article is neutral? Hugh (talk) 05:43, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Do you? The Garbage Skow (talk) 18:07, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't know anything about the topic but this article seems to be extremely out of the neutrality guidelines. I'm just an observer, not a Wikipeditor so I hope someone can clean this up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.215.64.82 (talk) 04:49, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree this articles is problematic, in terms of referencing as well as POV. But it's low priority with WP:CHICAGO, and I think rightfully so - I think a better use of our time is to focus on getting the articles on the major actors mentioned here right. I don't deny it's existence, I think the subject is worthy of a brief WP article - after all it has been the topic of books and political science papers - but most of THIS article could go as far as I'm concerned. I think of the machine as an interpretation of the story of Chicago, I dunno maybe analogous perhaps to how some (Oliver Stone) interpret American history as an artefact of a corporate military/industrial complex. Hugh (talk) 20:39, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Cook County Democratic Party

Does the Cook County Democratic Party have an article? Hugh (talk) 06:17, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't look like they do. They probably ought to though. The Garbage Skow (talk) 04:03, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I agree, Cook County Democratic Party does not have an article, but should. I would like to wl to Cook County Democratic Party, for example, in the bios of members. Do you think Cook County Democratic Party should be a separate article from Cook County Regular Democratic Organization? Hugh (talk) 04:11, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes it should be separate. In theory, it should be longer, and should contain a heading and paragraph about the Regular Democratic Organization, with a "For more information, see >...". That's what I think. There should be plenty to write a fairly large, detailed article about the CCDP. It's probably worth starting out in a sandbox until it's in good shape and then requesting deletion of the redirect from Cook County Democratic Part, and then moving the sandbox to that name. Good luck with your writing! The Garbage Skow (talk) 01:12, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. So, the separate Cook County Democratic Party article, separate from Cook County Regular Democratic Organization, don't you suppose Cook County Democratic Party would have a lot of duplicate content from Cook County Regular Democratic Organization? Hugh (talk) 15:41, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Not at all. The history of the Democratic Party begins long before the Regular Democratic Organization existed. The latter did not exist until about 1930-1931 when it was basically created by Anton Cermak. The modern Democratic party goes back into the 1800s. A lot has happened in the Democratic Party that had nothing to do with the Regular Organization... elections, many politicians, etc. I would imagine an article about the Party would be much broader and as I said, a subhead about this article with a paragraph and a link to this article. The Garbage Skow (talk) 01:28, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

"I would imagine an article about the Party would be much broader" in talk space but in article space "The organization is not the Cook County Democratic Party itself, but a subset of it." which is it? diff Hugh (talk) 02:18, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand the question. The Regular Organization does not equal Cook County Democratic Party. I've been very clear and consistent about that. As I've said above, the history of the Democratic Party in Cook County and Chicago has a great deal of history, reducing it to an article that is just about the Chicago Machine (essentially a clique that has existed on and off since roughly 1931) is like saying that the English aristocracy didn't exist before Henry VIII). The Garbage Skow (talk) 04:23, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

When you say Cermak "basically created" the Cook County Regular Democratic Organization, did he incorporate a corporation or register a political committee or otherwise establish an organization called the "Cook County Regular Democratic Organization?" Is that what he called it? Hugh (talk) 16:03, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Read this which explains it in pretty clear terms. Particularly, The potent Democratic machine that dominated Chicago politics for nearly half a century formed under the leadership of Anton Cermak, a Bohemian immigrant of working-class origins. Are you planning on writing an article about the Democratic Party or not? There is more than enough material to have both an article about the Regular Organization and the Democratic Party. The Garbage Skow (talk) 04:23, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the reference. It does not mention a Cook County Regular Democratic Organization. It mentions Democrats and Republicans and a Democratic machine. Did Cermak call what he created the "Cook County Regular Democratic Organization?" Hugh (talk) 07:01, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

The Democratic machine and Cook County Regular Democratic Organization are the same thing. You know it yourself. Are you planning on writing an article about the Democratic Party or not? This article can either be named as it currently is or can be renamed "Chicago Democratic machine" or "Chicago machine", all names it is recognized by. I don't care which. But the machine is not the party, and vice versa. The Garbage Skow (talk) 04:37, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. "The Democratic machine and Cook County Regular Democratic Organization are the same thing." Do you have a reference for this? Thanks again. Hugh (talk) 04:48, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Are you planning on writing an article about the Democratic Party or not? Do you think they are not the same? The Garbage Skow (talk) 18:08, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Hijacking

Somebody apparently wanted to create an article focusing on the "Chicago Machine" and hijacked this article to do so. This article is not about Chicago, but rather the local committees of the 50 city wards and 30 SUBURBAN TOWNSHIPS that make up the Democratic Party in COOK COUNTY. I have reversed the move and undid much of the uncited edits. Furthermore, the editor who did this betrays a lack of understanding of a number of nuances of the subject. For one, the RDO and the CCDP are ONE IN THE SAME. Any further moves should be discussed for consensus PRIOR to action. -- Homeaccount (talk) 16:43, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

"30 SUBURBAN TOWNSHIPS that make up the Democratic Party in COOK COUNTY." (Shouting in original) This article has many sentences of which the subject is "machine," "Machine," or "Chicago machine" but it has no content related to the 30 suburban townships that make up the Democratic Party in Cook County. Who is hijacking? Hugh (talk) 04:46, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

"the editor who did this betrays a lack of understanding of a number of nuances of the subject" Are you a subject matter expert on Democratic Party of Cook County? Do you believe only a subject matter expert can contribute to this article? Hugh (talk) 04:46, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Re: your recent redirect of Chicago machine (political machine) to Democratic Party of Cook County, are they the same thing? Are there not areas of the DPCC outside of Chicago? All DPCC members were/are participants in the Chicago Machine and vice versa? Many pages link to both, so we need to be careful here. What do you think? Hugh (talk) 17:36, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you or your commitment to citations. Your recent reversion removed some content without citations but left many others, and removed many inline requests for citations. May I ask, what was your thinking there? Hugh (talk) 17:36, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

May I rephrase more broadly, what do you see as the role of inline citation in this article? Thanks. Hugh (talk) 18:27, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

The article should be improved to the standards outlined in Misplaced Pages:Inline citation. Now that this has come to my attention, I have already begun this process. -- Homeaccount (talk) 18:31, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Here is the fundamental problem with the original re-direct, it pointed EVERY reference to the Cook County Democratic party in Misplaced Pages to the content fork you created about the machine. Hence, if an article about Chicago Committeemen John Arena or Scott Waugespack mentions they are committeeman of the RDO - the Cook County Democratic Party - the link pointed the reader to the fork about the machine. This unhelpful and just plain wrong. If an article is discussing a suburban committeeman as a member of the Cook County Democratic Party again, the link pointed to your fork about the "Chicago Machine". Much of the content, such as it was, that was removed would be better placed in the Political history of Chicago article, or if you insist, you can try to recreate a fork at Chicago machine (political machine), but I suspect somebody will eventually merge it with this article or Political history of Chicago. What ever is done, this article is about the party and it should remain here. Homeaccount (talk) 18:04, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree that our efforts to sort this out are greatly complicated from the unfortunate fact that many articles link to Chicago machine (political machine) and many articles link to Democratic Party of Cook County.

This could not be any more incorrect. A mere FIVE articles link to Chicago machine (political machine). -- Homeaccount (talk) 18:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Then let us focus on the redirect. May I respectfully ask again, do you believe of Chicago machine (political machine) and Democratic Party of Cook County are the same thing? May I ask that we review WP:REDIRECT together? May I please request that you identify one or more of the listed "reasons for redirect" that might justify the redirect of Chicago machine (political machine) to Democratic Party of Cook County? Thank you. Hugh (talk) 19:05, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

No need to discuss the redirect as the page was found to meet the criteria for speedy delete. --Homeaccount (talk) 00:05, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

You wrote "Any further moves should be discussed for consensus PRIOR to action." Thank you for your commitment to concensus. Yet while leaving unanswered attempts at dialog from a fellow wikipedian I see you have nominated Chicago machine (political machine) for speedy deletion and changed the disambiguation page for Chicago machine to include Democratic Party of Cook County. Do I understand from your edits that your answer to my original, as yet unanswered question (above), is that, yes, you do believe that the Chicago machine (political machine) and Democratic Party of Cook County are the same thing? May I ask again for you to please cite, from wp redirect policy, the specific basis upon which this redirect is appropriate? Thanks again. Hugh (talk) 00:17, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

"this article is about the party" Not sure if I agree. First, it is not much of an article at all, it has problems with neutrality and verifiability. Also, the content is more Political history of Chicago, as distinct from Political history of Chicago in that it is from the distinct POV of a particular interpretation of the Political history of Chicago in terms of machine politics, which is just one of many possible interpretations of the Political history of Chicago. I agree the Democratic Party of Cook County deserves a neutral, well-referenced article, and the Chicago machine (political machine) deserves a neutral, well-referenced article (better yet in terms of neutrality might be that the content of Chicago machine (political machine) is integrated into Political history of Chicago as one POV), but it seems to me this article is not a very good job of either. Hugh (talk) 18:47, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

If you feel this article does not adequately describe the subject, then THIS article should be improved with cited material. Moving it elsewhere is a textbook example of Content forking. --Homeaccount (talk) 18:37, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

The problem with this move is it was not a move at all, but a back-door deletion of our article on the second largest Democratic county party in the country. I occasionally google the article when I need to refer to it and it is always the #1 hit. The other day I googled it and it didn't come up at all, which is when the "move" came to my attention. -- Homeaccount (talk) 20:11, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of Chicago machine (political machine)

We currently have pages titled: Chicago Democratic Machine, Chicago political machine, and Chicago's Democratic machine, All of them redirect here to Democratic Party of Cook County. The situation was thoroughly explained on the request and an admin felt that the old redirect page met the criteria for deletion. Setting up another page at Chicago machine (political machine) is at best an example of a content fork and more likely would end up being a POV fork. It probably doesn't pass WP:TITLE, either. I would be more interested in debating moving this article back to Cook County Democratic Party, which is the name of the organization as recognized by the Illinois Board of Elections and where the article sat for many years until the bold move of a lone editor. -- Homeaccount (talk) 15:48, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Article as it currently stands

All requested citations have been included. The article has been expanded substantially to bring it closer in line with NPOV standards and to further discuss the past and present state of the Cook County Democratic Party. I removed the citation request from the top of the page. This article is not a good article, it is not even "C" class article, but it IS a good start and it gives a basic over of the subject. Much work still needs to be done, particularly enumerating the different chairman and discussing each of their tenures. -- Homeaccount (talk) 05:30, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

"This article is not a good article" agreed! Hugh (talk) 00:21, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

"a good start and it gives a basic over of the subject" Perhaps a good start and basic overview of the "Chicago machine" interpretation of the 20th century of the Political history of Chicago, but this article is not about its titular subject. It mentions "machine" and "Chicago machine" and "Machine" much more often than it does the titular subject. It is unencyclopedic in repeatedly describing the ebb & flow of undefined "power" and "influence" in poetic terms including the metaphors of a living thing and a mechanism, all the while meticulously avoiding verifiable facts and events. Further, it fails as a stand-alone article, requiring the reader to read the referenced book sources before the article can be understood. Hugh (talk) 00:21, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

"enumerating the different chairman and discussing each of their tenures" A minimum requirement for a "good start" or "C" class article on the Democratic Party of Cook County. After all, the Democratic Party of Cook County is a real organization with real members and a real history full of real events and real facts. The "Chicago machine" on the other hand is an interpretation, a POV, on the political history of Chicago in the 20th century advanced by some authors. Other equally valid and significant interpretations of the political history of Chicago in the 20th century include that of economic class corporate vs. worker and ethnicity, but these are given short shrift in favor of one editor's theory, the "political machine" interpretation. Hugh (talk) 00:21, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

"Much work still needs to be done, particularly enumerating the different chairman and discussing each of their tenures." We are in agreement that this article is bereft of the most basic facts that might qualify it as an article on the titular subject. With that agreement in mind, may I suggest a way forward for much of the content on this page. I believe it will be easier to change all the references in this article from Democratic Party of Cook County to "Chicago machine", then it would be to clean up all the off-topic references to "machine," "Machine," and "Chicago machine." Rework the intro to clearly explain that this article describes in overview a particular interpretation, a framework for understanding the Political history of Chicago, notable for being advanced by some book authors. Then we retitle (move) it to match its actual subject, "Chicago machine (political machine)," with "(political machine)" suffix to distinguish it from the professional soccer team. We may be criticized for POV-forking Political history of Chicago, but I believe we can defend article deletion, as the political machine interpretation of Political history of Chicago is notable in its own right for the number of popular history books that embrace it. Hugh (talk) 04:27, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Sincerely I believe you would be much happier writing an article about the machine interpretation of the 20th century political history of Chicago. Reading the "article as it currently stands" convinces me it is the article you are trying to get out. You would enjoy a little more leeway in that you could clearly state up front that what you are doing is summarizing a particular interpretation: what Royko, O'Connor, Rakove, Kass and others have written in books ("Clout", "Boss," "Pharoah," and others) for popular audiences, and thereby freed somewhat from the encyclopedic constraints of sticking to the facts & events of the topic of the Democratic Party of Cook County. You could write about "power" and "influence" waxing & waning and uniting & fracturing because those are the organizing metaphors those authors used. May I toss out an analogy: we here on wp have many articles on the history of the industrial revolution, and we have an article on Marxism, but the history articles are not Marxist history. What do you think? Hugh (talk) 17:59, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

The criticism that the article "fails as a stand-alone article, requiring the reader to read the referenced book sources before the article can be understood" is probably best shrugged off by reminding you that Misplaced Pages is a work in progress. Give that a read, look at the top of this page, and note that this article is "start class" and not yet "FA class". You don't seem to understand that our article has cited sources that state the Cook County Democratic Party operated as a political machine from the time of Cermak's death until it ceased to function - at the earliest when Bilandic lost the mayoral Democratic primary to Jane Byrne (according to the New York Times) and at the latest when Pat Levar lost to Dorothy Brown for Clerk of the Courts (according to the Chicago Tribune). These points are cited with proper sources. You tagged passages as "citation needed" and when the citations were supplied you went back and tagged the cited passage as "vague" or "awk". That borders on tendentious editing and replacing the tags could be seen as gaming the system to avoid a 3 revert vio. Again, your failure to understand even basic concepts, such as the fact that the Cook County Democratic Party and the RDO are the same thing is causing much of the confusion here. -- Homeaccount (talk) 20:24, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

"your failure to understand even basic concepts" Thank you for your attempt to identify a source of the confusion here. Again, may I please repeat an unanswered question from earlier? Are you a subject matter expert on Democratic Party of Cook County? Do you believe only a subject matter expert can contribute to this article? Thank you in advance for your reply. Hugh (talk) 20:31, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

"the Cook County Democratic Party operated as a political machine from the time of Cermak's death until it ceased to function - at the earliest when Bilandic lost the mayoral Democratic primary to Jane Byrne (according to the New York Times) and at the latest when Pat Levar lost to Dorothy Brown for Clerk of the Courts (according to the Chicago Tribune). These points are cited with proper sources." Whether or not something is in a reliable source is not the be-all and end-all of whether it should be in wp. We are called to weigh the breadth of rs and embrace multiple POVs and form judgements. That major dailies disagree on the "death" date of the "machine" is not at all surprising - the 2 articles you cite are not obituaries, and the "machine" can't die because it is not a living thing, it is a trope, a metaphor, shorthand used by book and newspaper writers. No one who read the NYT declaring the "machine" dead when Brown beat Levar did anything except chuckle, except maybe you I guess. Tomorrow some oddball event will transpire and a City Hall beat writer will notice, "No way this would have happened back in the day," and we will read once again of the "death" of the "machine." Hugh (talk) 16:49, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

"you went back and tagged the cited passage as "vague" or "awk"." That a passage is a paraphrase of rs does not immunize it from vagueness or awkwardness; rs can be vague and awkward. Hugh (talk) 17:03, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Any one can edit this article, but since it was restored to its proper palce you seem to have an axe to grind. What question did I miss? -- Homeaccount (talk) 20:34, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

"Vague"/"Awk"/etc tags=

A flurry of largely unhelpful tags were littered around the article, mostly concerning material that was already cited. LOOK in the original source BEFORE you tag a cited sentence. In many cases, the language was lifted as closely as possible without creating a copyright vio. -- Homeaccount (talk) 18:43, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Inline templates may be used to draw the attention of fellow editors to a questionable citation, but that is only one of many legitimate uses of inline templates. Please see WP:ILT for more information. Hugh (talk) 21:28, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

NPOV

What can be done to make this article more neutral? That should be established before too much more work is done it. --Homeaccount (talk) 20:28, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

May I respectfully repeat some some suggestions posted earlier, to which you did not respond, despite your repeated calls for developing consensus on the talk page? Hugh (talk) 20:36, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

...may I suggest a way forward for much of the content on this page. I believe it will be easier to change all the references in this article from Democratic Party of Cook County to "Chicago machine", then it would be to clean up all the off-topic references to "machine," "Machine," and "Chicago machine." Rework the intro to clearly explain that this article describes in overview a particular interpretation, a framework for understanding the Political history of Chicago, notable for being advanced by some book authors. Then we retitle (move) it to match its actual subject, "Chicago machine (political machine)," with "(political machine)" suffix to distinguish it from the professional soccer team. We may be criticized for POV-forking Political history of Chicago, but I believe we can defend article deletion, as the political machine interpretation of Political history of Chicago is notable in its own right for the number of popular history books that embrace it. Hugh (talk) 04:27, 25 March 2013 (UT)

Sincerely I believe you would be much happier writing an article about the machine interpretation of the 20th century political history of Chicago. Reading the "article as it currently stands" convinces me it is the article you are trying to get out. You would enjoy a little more leeway in that you could clearly state up front that what you are doing is summarizing a particular interpretation: what Royko, O'Connor, Rakove, Kass and others have written in books ("Clout", "Boss," "Pharoah," and others) for popular audiences, and thereby freed somewhat from the encyclopedic constraints of sticking to the facts & events of the topic of the Democratic Party of Cook County. You could write about "power" and "influence" waxing & waning and uniting & fracturing because those are the organizing metaphors those authors used. May I toss out an analogy: we here on wp have many articles on the history of the industrial revolution, and we have an article on Marxism, but the history articles are not Marxist history. What do you think? Hugh (talk) 17:59, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

What you "sincerely believe" I want to do is irrelevant. The notion that we should delete Misplaced Pages's article about the Cook County Democratic Party and move all the work ever done here on this subject to a POV fork of your creation is not going to get any traction with any other editor. I encourage other editors to chime in. In the mean time, I have supplied citations that were requested and I will continue to add information to the article here - you should, too. -- Homeaccount (talk) 20:43, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

"a POV fork of your creation" This article nominally titled Democratic Party of Cook County as it stands is a POV fork, a "political machine" POV telling of the topic of Political history of Chicago which is in turn comprised of material of dubious quality excised from the history section of Chicago. Again, the political machine interpretation is a worthy wp topic, and the Democratic Party of Cook County is a worthy wp topic, but claiming they are one & the same and trying to do justice to both in one article is futile and misleading and biased, biased against the vast areas of the Cook County outside Chicago, biased against the many unmentioned here courageous members of the Democratic Party of Cook County who did not participate in the machine, and biased against the many other interpretations of the political history of Chicago in the 20th century, including ethnographic models and economic models and others. Again, my recommendation is to use most of this content as a start for Chicago machine (political machine) and some as a start for Democratic Party of Cook County. Hugh (talk) 21:18, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

"Daley assumed the leadership of the machine" Let us take one low-hanging example of the pervasive POV problems with this article. To make this claim, do you recognize any responsibility to reflect alternative POVs in wp? What did RJD himself say about him assuming leadership of the "machine"? He denied it. His POV is not mentioned. This is just one example. More generally, the article takes as given the existence of a thing that from another POV does not exist, then treats that thing as a sort of living organism that grows and dies, then is reborn, which in any context is nothing but sloppy writing. It's lazy writing because it's facile to write about an unseen hand, verifiable facts & events are hard. Hugh (talk)

Here's another way to see the pervasive POV problems with this article. Read thru it again, but substitute in your head Democratic Party of Cook County, the titular subject of this article, for each mention of "machine" or "Machine" or "Chicago machine." It doesn't work. It doesn't work because most of this article is not about Democratic Party of Cook County. Hugh (talk) 22:05, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

"That should be established before too much more work is done it." I note you made a dozen some edits after this post. May I ask, do you include yourself in your calls to hold off on edits pending consensus? Hugh (talk) 18:27, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

• Start-Class WikiProject Illinois articles
• Low-importance WikiProject Illinois articles
• Start-Class Chicago articles
• Low-importance Chicago articles
• WikiProject Chicago articles