Talk:Wisconsin
|
|
| Contents |
the farm
STOP SAYING THE FARM IS TYPICAL.
Sure, there are several, but the way i just cahnged it (to say its one area) is acceptable, and 99% of wisconsin doesnt look like that. And no, we arn't stuck in the 70s, as some shows may have you think.\
- True that. Most of the Wisconsin population are in the cities. Many farms are giant comercial-grade, while there are still a lot that are family-owned. Sean WI 04:59, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Wondering how to edit this State Entry?
The WikiProject U.S. States standards might help.
An event mentioned in this article is a May 29 selected anniversary.
"Major" and "Minor" cities
I have no idea what the standards for inclusion in these categories might be. Some of the entries, like the one for Stockholm, seem like jokes to me. I don't know whether there are definitions of "major" and "minor" cities, but personally, I don't think a city with a population less than 100,000 qualifies as "major."
I decided to put in the populations and let people judge for themselves. Dpbsmith 02:25, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Wisconsin Glaciation
The recent disambiguation link is a good idea, but the linked page makes no reference to the Wisconsin glaciation. This is quite strange and should be fixed. Chris Dolan 18:05, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Added Some Content
I added some content regarding cities in Wisconsin as well as adding the picture of the Milwaukee Art museum to emphasize that Wisconsin does have cities, it’s surprising but people really seem to think Wisconsin is some kind of urban less expanse of tress and farms. I also added some info about wisconsin's products and how California now produces more milk. If you spot a problem please correct it in terms of facts or formatting. Cheers. --Ic0n0 23:31, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Please, let's tone down the boosterism...
...it's getting out of hand.
- "In addition to vast rural areas Wisconsin is home to several large cities, including Milwaukee and Madison. These large cities add a dynamic urban edge to the state’s otherwise rural setting which is often overlooked by those passing through the state. Both Madison and Milwaukee boast world-class universities and night life."
Now, Milwaukee is by most standards a large city, not humongous but bigger than, say, Boston. (And the Milwaukee Journal is a better paper than the Boston Globe). It's one of the twenty biggest cities in the U. S. But Madison a "large city?" Population 200,000? I don't think so.
Similarly, UW-Madison could be called a "world-class university," whatever that means. But UWM? It's a perfectly respectable university, but it's hardly a public Ivy.
And what do you mean by "world-class universities," plural? I'm only aware of only one university, singular, in Madison. There might be more than one university in Milwaukee--is Marquette actually in Milwaukee? But "world-class" is stretching it.
And that "dynamic urban edge" guff really should go. Wikipedia is not a tourist brochure. Dpbsmith (talk) 00:06, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Well, i can see where your problem with it lies and i will tone it down. It's just that the picture of the farm as "Typical wisconsin" is pretty anoying i just overcompinsated and i will fix it. --Ic0n0 06:27, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I cut that last paragraph i added, it doesn't really add anything. I would like to be to emphasize that Wisconsin has many medium sized cities in addition in Milwaukee and Madison but coming up with a way to do that which avoids sounding like a tourist brochure is going to be more difficult.--Ic0n0 06:41, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks! There must be a way to make the point you want to make without sounding boosterish... I'll think about it myself. Wisconsin certainly isn't the only state that consists of a small number of big cities, many small cities and towns, with large active agricultural land in between. Actually, California really isn't all that different, yet nobody thinks of California is being solely a "farm state" or would use a picture of a farm as "typical" of California... But you know, WIsconsin has sort of brought it on itself by using the slogan "America's Dairyland." Dpbsmith (talk) 10:58, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Well the idea I am trying to convey is that Wisconsin has a lot of medium sized cities, those between 50,000 and 150,000. I mean I can think of a ton, Eau Claire, La Crosse, Wausau, Green bay, Appleton, Oshkosh, Sheboygan, Janesville, Kenosha, and Racine are all cities that stand on their own, expect maybe Racine and Kenosha which are really dual suburbs of Milwaukee and Chicago. But the point is that is there are more independent “anchor” cities of significant size then most of the surrounding states have including Illinois if we don’t consider Chicagoland.
- I agree. I don't really know how to compare it with other states, but "a lot of medium-sized cities" is the characteristic pattern.
- But your right, those of us in Wisconsin have to a large extent placed this rural dairy farm image on ourselves with the constant emphasis on milk and cheese. I am from Milwaukee and as a result am actually quite bitter at the image of Wisconsin that is generally presented, hence my overcompensation earlier. There is almost a sort of downstate and upstate thing going on in Wisconsin like in New York State, a lot of us in the Milwaukee area find we have very little in common with the rest of the state. It’s a bit of a tangent but for example I have never seen a cow closer then 30 feet or milked one as I am sure most Wisconsinites haven’t. I guess unlike some Wisconsinites I don’t feel pride in the whole rural farm description they seem to relish. Anyway, when I figure out a good way to write more content without the unnecessary POV I will do so. --Ic0n0 11:56, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Well the idea I am trying to convey is that Wisconsin has a lot of medium sized cities, those between 50,000 and 150,000. I mean I can think of a ton, Eau Claire, La Crosse, Wausau, Green bay, Appleton, Oshkosh, Sheboygan, Janesville, Kenosha, and Racine are all cities that stand on their own, expect maybe Racine and Kenosha which are really dual suburbs of Milwaukee and Chicago. But the point is that is there are more independent “anchor” cities of significant size then most of the surrounding states have including Illinois if we don’t consider Chicagoland.
- Maybe something like this:
- Wisconsin's self-promotion as "America's Dairyland" sometimes leads to a mistaken impression that it is an exclusively rural state. In fact Wisconsin contains cities and towns of all sizes. Milwaukee is a city slightly larger than Boston and part of the "Chicagoland" megalopolis on the edge of Lake Michigan. Madison's triple identity as state capital, university town, and working city give it a cultural richness unusual in a city its size. Medium-sized cities dot the state and anchor a network of working farms surrounding them.
- Brewers pasted a "beer" label on Milwaukee, which probably doesn't help its reputation.
- The article doesn't currently say anything about what I think is fairly extensive network of Amish communities in Wisconsin.
- By the way, the list of cities could use some attention. Some time ago there was a silly list of "major cities" and people kept adding rather small towns to it, I guess either as pranks or because they wanted their home town on the list. I sort of stabilized things by stating the actual population of each town listed, and listing every city over 50,000 under the neutral title "cities with populations over 50,000." But the "other cities and towns" list could use some judicious pruning. Dpbsmith (talk) 13:29, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- I have added your suggestion Dpbsmith with a really minor tweak, but you can see for yourself. I think it looks pretty good, thoughts? --Ic0n0 01:46, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Cheeseheads
I think perhaps the cheese head stuff belongs more in a cultural area of the article rather then in the first paragraph. Just a thought. --Ic0n0 03:19, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- You are correct. Until someone puts it there, I'm going to delete it. It's irrelevant to this article. The "cheesehead" thing is less than 10 years old, and almost exclusively a Green Bay Packer fan innovation. It has far less to do with Wisconsin culture than with Green Bay sportsfannery, and should be included there, with perhaps a passing reference made in a "Wisconsin Culture" article. TShilo12 04:17, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- "Cheeseheads" is definitely more than 10 years old. I'm not sure how far back it goes, but I lived in the Chicago area more than ten years ago and "cheesehead" was often tossed about jocularly by area radio hosts. That and phrases like "behind the cheddar curtain" have been around for longer than ten years and used to make jokingly derogatory references to all the neighbors to the north, not only to Green Bay residents. Although I agree that it probably should not be in the intro section and may be more appropriate in the culture section. User:Bkonrad/sig 13:13, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)
Location of Pettit Ice Center? West Allis or Milwaukee?
The Pettit Ice Center is strongly associated with West Allis, but I'm not quite sure on pinning down its legal location.
Its address is variously given as Pettit Ice Center, 500 S. 84th St., West Allis e.g. here (http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?BRD=1401&dept_id=173342&newsid=13725044&PAG=461&rfi=9). Try a Google search on "500 S. 84th St" "West Allis" (http://www.google.com/search?q=%22500+S.+84th+St%22+%22West+Allis%22&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8) to see what I mean. Yet [the official website (http://www.thepettit.com)] uses the same street address but puts itself in Milwaukee: "National Ice Center, 500 South 84th Street, Milwaukee, WI 53214... Location I-94 & 84th Street."
There's no particular mystery about the location, which is on the Wisconsin State Fair Park which obviously is on or close to the border between West Allis and Milwaukee. Obviously the park complex as a whole spans the border and has parts in West Allis and parts in Milwaukee. The Wisconsin State Fair Park (http://www.wsfp.state.wi.us/home/wsfp/CONTACT_US/index.htm) gives its address as: "640 South 84th Street, West Allis, Wis. 53214." (But the West Allis West Milwaukee C of C website (http://www.wawmchamber.org/fp/city.htm#Recreation) gives the address of the State Fair Park as "8100 W. Greenfield Ave. West Allis, WI 53214"
I queried The Pettit and receive this reply: From: rmulterer@thepettit.com Date: February 11, 2005 10:06:33 PM EST
Since we are adjacent to I-94, our mailing address is Milwaukee. So we are considered to be in Milwaukee, but West Allis is mere yards away.
Obviously this has something to do with where the office is, where the actual rink is, where the state fairgrounds are, where the rink used to be, etc. etc. This would all be a matter of West Allis pride rather than geography. For now I'm leaving it as being "in" West Allis but maybe at some point the language should be wordsmithed. Dpbsmith (talk) 15:05, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
The borders of the city of Milwaukee are really odd in places, some parts of the city on the far south side are only contiguous with the rest of the city by like 3-4 yards along a road. It’s just weird. But as far as I am aware the ice rink is in fact in the city of Milwaukee despite the stair fair property being mostly in west allies, but it’s commonly considered west allis. Pettit Center Location (http://www.ic0n0.com/ice.jpg)The dark line is the border. Milwaukee Borders with Ice Center (http://www.ic0n0.com/mil.jpg) As you can see milwaukee has some strange borders. You can look a really cool gis here Map Milwaukee (http://www.milwaukee.gov/display/router.asp?docid=3480) --Ic0n0 22:21, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Major Businesses
Under "Misc Information" should we have a link to a list of major businesses that are headquarted in Wisconsin? Sean WI 05:06, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Etymology
[1] (http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/topics/wisconsin-name/) indicates that the origin of the name is French Ouisconsin which comes from the Ojibwe Miskasin, which itself would be a haplologied form of Miskasinsin, literally "red-stone-area". The name was originally applied to the river, and referred to, I would imagine, red stones in the area. I'm going to wait to change the claim in the article to get other people's input. --Whimemsz 15:08, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)
- Whimemsz, I think pretty much anything that can be backed up with reliable source material not only can, but ought to be included precisely because any and every other reference that speaks to the subject of the origin of the name, specifically mentions that nobody knows the etymology for certain. Any discussion in this article should, regardless of how many different sources are brought into the discussion, make this clear. Tomer TALK 03:41, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)