Jump to content

Talk:Milwaukee/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

1

ATTENTION: I am a writer with Milwaukee Magazine doing a piece about the wikipedia entry of "Milwaukee." I'm interested in hearing from anybody who has participated on this entry over the years. Please contact me via email at kathryn.pelech@milwaukeemagazine.com, if you're interested.

Very Best, Katie Pelech Milwaukee Magazine

Population Question

This article lists the city as the 22nd largest in the U.S., while the Wisconsin article lists it as the 19th, is this an error? Is it by population or by size? Clavette 19:14, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

It is an error. Since the 2004 census estimate, the city has been 22nd in population. Prior to that, it was 19th (after the 2000 census). The Wisconsin article should be changed. --Polemick 23:01, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

But how is it an error? That is an estimate, not a positive figure The Person Who Is Strange 20:18, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Crime

I think it should be granted consideration that a crime section be added, mainly because of the hihg-profile and violent crimes that have occurred in the past few years, as well as the need to inform people that these crimes are anomolies and that Milwaukee's crime rate is relatively average for cities of its size.

Actually, I think we should remove the crime section, for the very reason that Milwaukee doesn't really have that much of a crime problem. Milwaukee does not rate among the 25 most dangerous cities, and most other city articles do not include a "crime" section. There are two other considerations here: the crimes that occur in Milwaukee are not all that high profile. It might seem like that to those living in Wisconsin, but these crimes receive almost no national coverage. If I didn't read jsonline every day, I wouldn't hear almost anything about Milwaukee (I now live in Phoenix). There have only been a few cases that receive media attention (Charlie Young beating and that guy who was supposedly ambushed but was really buying drugs), and despite the fact that the New York Times covered Milwaukee in a recent crime article, people don't really associate Milwaukee with crime (at least people outside of Wisconsin don't). Besides, read CNN every day and you'll start to see that every city has some negative crime story eventually.
And there is another reason for not mentioning crime. Although the person above has good intentions (by trying to state that the recent crimes are anomolies), that is not how people's minds work (and I study these things). If you were walking down the street one day and ran into me, what would you think if I said "Hi! My name is Nick. You might have heard that I'm a horrible child molester, but really my sexual desire for children is no different than that of most people my age." That's not a way to make a good impression, and listing details about Milwaukee crimes (when there are similar crimes in all major cities) is no way to leave readers with a good impression of Milwaukee. -Nicktalk 21:42, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, the edit does actually address the fact that Milwaukee is not as dangerous as many people think. That is the reason I included it, because of the negative national attention of recent crimes. As for other cities not having a crie section, that is just not true. Chicago and Baltimore both have crime sections, and I found those two after a minute of searching.

Actually, you missed the point of my post entirely. The crime section as it is written will not make people feel Milwaukee is less dangerous than they had originally thought. There was only very limited media attention paid to Milwaukee, and similar crimes in other cities are regularly covered by the national media. Also, I claimed that "most cities" do not have a crime section, and if you keep searching, you will find that to be true. The cities that do have a crime section (Chicago, Baltimore, New Orleans, St Louis, Detroit) typically have a very high crime rate.
But if we are to keep the crime section, then it needs substantial re-writing. The first paragraph generally needs an improved writing style, and there are aspects of it that can be deleted. A source needs to be cited for the "several more beatings occurred" claim. I am aware of only one more--the one mentioned in the section. The second paragraph contains inaccuracies: the crime rates appear to be mixed up in some way. It is written that Milwaukee had "only" 88 murders in 2005 (which I believe is untrue), but later on the 2005 murder rate is referred to as a "spike." These statements contradict one another, and I will have to delete this paragraph until we get the stats correct. -Nicktalk 17:53, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

The 2004 murders totaled 88 and the spike occured in 2005. I don't know if this was a typo but those are facts that can be easily attained and reputed. As for the crime paragraph, I am happy with it's position within the demographics section.


no, i completely agree that the Crime section should be removed. you do not have this for all other major cities and, as Nick points out, Milwaukee is not in the top 25 cities in regards to worst crime rates. remove the Crime section. -mm

Temperature

Is the average July temperature really 79 F as this article says? Even the cited source doesn't say this. I would think the average July temperature is 70.9 F http://www.cityrating.com/citytemperature.asp?City=Milwaukee or at least something significantly lower than 79 RealFerrari 17:50, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I believe 79 was supposed to be the average high temp, not the average mean temp. Either way, it looks incorrect: Here are the monthly averages from Weather.com. -Nicktalk 18:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Population Concerns

I question the accuracy of the 2005 population estimate of 592,765. As much as I wish this were the case, as far as I know the Census has not come out with a 2005 estimate for municipalities yet. If it came from a source other than the census, I think we should question the authenticity of that report, as they are often inaccurate and not official.

Don't worry, I am pretty sure they have come out with one. And sign your name with four tildes. The Person Who Is Strange 20:21, 8 July 2006 (UTC) 


 I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION: there are new estimates by the World Gazzetteer about metro population estimates. As you can see here, http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Largest_metropolitan_areas_in_the_Americas

the Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis population is estimated at 1,753,355. I think this figure should be used as it is a more recent estimate than the u.s. census bureau's. if nobody objects, i'll change it. --134.48.241.76 16:58, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Recent Edit

I recently made three edits that were reverted without explanation: 1) "bubbler" is used in Milwaukee, but also in various other locations (Read the article on Bubblers), and therefore it is not "rarely heard anywhere else." 2) ATM's is incorrect punctuation--it should be ATMs (see Strunk & White) 3) This is an encyclopedia article. Some song played by some guy in Chicago that parodies a local saying (ainahey) is not appropriate. And, by the way, I've never heard anyone in Milwaukee say "ainahey." -Nick 19:47, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the points above... although I've never heard anyone say "ainahey," I did talk to someone who said it was more common back in the day. A brief mention of the phrase (as the edit stands) should be sufficient. 72.131.44.247 21:40, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Your "explanation" for deleting was sarcastic and condescending. My silence in reverting it was every bit as appropriate as your "explanation". But since it's your pet page, I'll leave it be, ainahey. Wahkeenah 00:12, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I apologize--I didn't mean to seem condescending. I was a bit upset that some edits I made were just reverted without any explanation. Nick 00:54, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
10-4. Wahkeenah 01:05, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I was born and raised in Milwaukee (left at 18 in 1985) - I heard "ainahey" in Bay View a fair bit.

German roots

I am currently working on a reportage on german emmigrants for a local newspaper in the "Westerwald" area. I am looking for information on immigrants to Milwaukee. A whole village named "Sespenrod" near Heilberscheid went in 1853 to the USA. Since i am quite new to genealogy i am happy for any kind of information, e.g. contacts in Milwaukee. I am looking for descendants in particular, that might have diaries/photographs or other kind of memories on their roots. Thanks for your help, you can contact me at bastian@abwesend.de

Okay, this was a pretty sad entry. I added some information about the economy and the local cultural attractions, including summerfest and the museum (yes, yes, fellow Milwaukee people, I realize that "culture" is a relative term). I moved the section on the interstate highways to geography, and deleted the section on the street layout being "the same as Chicago" since it did not seem relevant to any topic, and clicking on it went to a blank page. Whoever put that in is more than welcome to return it to its old place, but should at least describe the layouts of Milwaukee's streets and compare it to Chicago's. This article could still use more info, especially on the city itself, its architecture (Cream City Brick, the Allen Bradley Tower, etc.), and its history. --Goodoldpolonius 02:13, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Demographics

The section lists that the population of Milwaukee is about 50% White. It also says that 38% of Milwaukeeans have German descent, 12.7% have Polish, 10% Irish, 5%English, 4% Italian 4%French. How can Milwaukee be 50 % White when that these number combined equal about 70%. There is a descrepency in these numbers. Maybe it means that some Causcasions lists multiple descents.

It is exactly that some people list multiple descents. One could have grandparents who are Polish, German, Irish and Italian. --mtz206 June 29, 2005 02:07 (UTC)

Festivals

Hey Psients. Drive to Chicago and ask people about the city of festivals and see if anyone knows what the hell you are talking about. Outside of Milwaukee, noone cares.

To 'Outside of Milwaukee'...

Maybe you don't realize that Summerfest is the biggest music festival in the world. The world. They will know what the hell you're talking about in Chicago, sir. --WikiFan04 16:02, 11 Feb 2005 (CST) P.S. Please get a user name, mister.

What I meant was that noone knows Milwaukee as the "city of festivals". Other cities have the equivalent of Summerfest. For example St. Louis has Fair St. Louis which attracts about 100,000 people each day. Message left by 131.151.103.121 (originally unsigned)
Milwaukee has long called itself the "City of Festivals." Whether or not someone from Chicago or St. Louis knows that isn't really an issue for the article to cover. (Can we try to keep this a bit more civil?) Cheers. --BaronLarf 18:07, May 24, 2005 (UTC)

While other cities have large festivals, Summerfest (a) is a music festival, (b) also attracts about 100,000 people per day and (c) runs for 11 days (as opposed to larger but shorter festivals). In addition to summerfest, the "city of festivals" moniker refers to the many weekend-long ethnic festivals held over the summer, with many of them having attendance in the 200,000-300,000 range. While other cities do have similar events, none that I have found have as many as Milwaukee. The festivals are an important part of Milwaukee, and do make Milwaukee unique. Nick 19:51, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Oh, yeah--and to that end, I vote for adding a short paragraph describing the festivals. Nick 19:57, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Kinda like the US has a World Series, but in reality, it isn't, eh? Tell you what, do yourself a favour, take a trip to Europe (or the UK, for that matter) and we'll discuss the numerous "summer festivals" held here. As for "ethnic", I won't comment, as it should be fairly evident.

I added a subsection called Festivals and wrote a short paragraph. There's a lot of room for expansion there, and I think we should even put in a chart with dates and locations. It's a start, any way.
I also think we should mention Jazz in the Park in either the Social Life, Festivals, or Music section. In fact, maybe those three should all be combined under Culture or something? Ozmodiar.x 06:15, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Street Layout similar to Chicago

In Milwaukee, they also have a numbering system like in Chicago. Fairview Avenue and Howell Ave are Base Lines. How does their numbering system differ from the Chicago Numbering System?

A better question is, how does Chicago's Numbering System differ from Milwaukee's Numbering System? --WikiFan04 16:05, 11 Feb 2005 (CST)

Metion of the city's street layout relative to some other city seems wholly unnecessary. --michael zimmer 00:55, Feb 12, 2005 (UTC)

Here's how Milwaukee's (and the county's) baselines work; they're not exactly "lines", especially around the downtown area.

  • the line running north-south (dividing, say, E. Silver Spring Dr. and W. Silver Spring Dr.) is primarily based on 1st St. on the north side, the baseline is N. 1st St. extended from Capitol Dr. south to the Milwaukee River, then continues as the Milwaukee River until the river bends east to the lake, which is where S. 1st St. picks up. the line then continues as S 1st. St. until it intersects with S. Chase Ave., and continues on Chase until that intersects with S. Howell Ave. The line remains S. Howell Ave. all the way through Oak Creek and the end of Milwaukee County. North of Capitol Dr. extending into Whitefish Bay and the other north suburbs, the baseline follows an extended line of N. 1st St., including N. Lydell Ave. (south of the Milwaukee River), N. Bay Ridge Ave. (north of Hampton Ave.), N. Seneca Ave (north of Cardinal Stritch University/Green Tree Rd.). the baseline becomes a little less tangible north of Brown Deer Rd., but still exists (an obvious manifestation of this being Ravine Baye Rd., which is divided into W. Ravine Baye Rd. and E. Ravine Baye Rd. without having a cross street to speak of). It essentially ends at the Milwaukee-Ozaukee county border.
  • the line running east-west (and dividing, e.g., N. 16th St. and S. 16th St.) starts with its east end on Lake Michigan at the harbor entrance, continues up the Milwaukee River and branches off onto the Menomonee River. it then branches off at W. Canal St., becomes a little fuzzy through the I-91/US-41 split and Miller Park area until W. Fairview Ave., where it continues along W. Fairview Ave. and its extended line (W. Hawthorne Ave., the small W. Fairview Ave at S. Curtis Rd./N. 121st St., the various segments of Golf Pkwy.) until it dissolves somewhere in Brookfield (definitively ending at Barker Rd.) when people must have noticed that they weren't in Milwaukee County anymore and didn't have to worry about north-south designations. --Tape 04:02, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

That's not 100% true. The lines are correct, but the statement about where it ends is iffy. (Mostly because where it ends is also iffy.) Only the City of Milwaukee proper is bound to the numbering system, and as such, anyone else using them is optional. I know that South Milwaukee, for example, uses both the S and E street prefixes and the numbering system. Greendale, on the otherhand, also inside Milwaukee County, uses just the numbering system for most streets (for example: 5627 Broad St.), and street prefixes mostly for streets that lead out of Greendale (S 76th, W Loomis, etc.) Also, in Waukesha county, W. Glengarry? In any case, this article is on the city Milwaukee, I think just leaving our any references to suburbs would be most appropriate. -slowpokeiv 18:15, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

I know this topic is dead, but if anyone cares to know... there are three basic types of street naming systems:
  • The New York scheme, which calls for numbering all of the streets. Directional runs are distinguished using "avenue" and "street". It is an orderly numbering system but lacks any character.
  • The complementary Boston scheme, which uses only place names. This system is common in street layouts that lack a grid pattern. It is a naming system with character but lacks any logical order.
  • Finally there is the Philadelphia scheme, which is a combination of the New York and Boston schemes. Streets are numbered in one direction and named in the other. It has some numerical order and some character.
The present Milwaukee street system uses the Philadelphia scheme. The north/south and east/west baselines (which are a lot simpler and logical than it's made out to be above) and numbering system, were realized by the City Engineers' office... hence the elegance in its simplicity.
Various commissions were created over the years to clean up the duplicate street names (from all of the different municipalities) and eliminate confusing sounding ones... when all of the hard work was done by these commissions and the City Engineer, the Common Council stepped in to assume responsibility. This includes naming rights, which frequently reflect names of "friends", family members, and other aldermen. Ordinance initially dictated that all like street runs have the same name to avoid confusion, but that has fallen by the wayside. A good example of this is 3rd Street, Old World Third Street, and Martin Luther King Drive.
My understanding is that all of the municipalities in Milwaukee County followed the recommendations made by the various commissions, and all currently work with each other to maintain street naming integrity. There was a lot of give and take on all sides, as evident by many of Milwaukee's far south side streets following Cudahy's and South Milwaukee's names for like runs. 24.211.0.91 01:31, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Neighborhoods

It seems that we're now adding descriptions of all the various neighborhoods to the article. I don't know what the standard is for other articles for major cities, but perhaps it would be better to create separate articles for each neighborhood and include the descriptive text in each of those. --mtz206 19:56, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

If the neighborhood merits a seperate article, then they should be created. But right now, it just seems like the descriptions are limited to two to three sentences, tops; not something that really needs to be broken out yet, in my opinion. See: Houston, Texas#Metropolitan area. But if you feel bold enough to create articles with more information in them, please, by all means do so. --BaronLarf 20:42, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
When I rewrote this section earlier today, I was mostly aiming at just reducing the inane remarks and somewhat-racist overtones the previous version had to it... though don't think the neighborhoods need anything more than the one or two sentence descriptions some of them have attached at all (if even *that* much). Anthony Dean 00:20, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
Yes, and thank you for making the changes you did. I meant to say "good job" on your user talk page, but it fell through the cracks. --BaronLarf 01:18, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
You're welcome. :-) Anthony Dean 03:01, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)
I feel that both Neighborhoods and Notable denizens should be moved off to their own sub-pages (might reduce the racially charged profiling), and more focus placed on History and Geography. Admittedly, I don't have the time right now to research for those sections. —Anonymous user 24.211.7.42
I've moved the Notable denizens to List of Milwaukeeans. Neighborhoods coule be moved, too, but I don't see how moving them would stop the racist language. Cheers.--BaronLarf June 30, 2005 03:17 (UTC)

You already have an article about the neighborhoods: here.--Ben414 14:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Notable Denziens: Deidre Hall

I reverted back to include Deidre Hall. Anonymous user 24.211.7.42's comment that "If we start listing 'common' actors and musicians this could go on forever" is invalid. It is not up to one user to determine who a "common" actor might be. IMO, Deidre Hall is "notable" given that she has been on Days of Our Lives for nearly 30 years and is quite well known. --mtz206 18:37, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

I have no problem with including any citzen that is wikipedia-worthy to a list. But, if we start to get a large enough list, I am in favor of moving it to its own article, with a prominent link from this article. --BaronLarf 18:55, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
Agreed. --mtz206 19:03, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
I disagree. My favorite actress is Heather Graham but you don't see me listing her. How about Gene Wilder, or Jerry Harrison, or Bob Uecker? This list could get quite long. -- Anonymous user 24.211.7.42, 19:12, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
Excluding the names of people who are worthy of inclusion into Wikipedia in a list of citizens based upon personal opinion is the pushing of ones own POV.--BaronLarf 19:31, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
Very well, lets start down that road. -- Anonymous user 24.211.7.42
I like your enthusiasm, but the point is not to "start down that road," but instead to craft a useful encyclopedic article on Milwaukee, including its noteworthy denizens. I also suggest you create an account. --mtz206 21:48, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia in Milwaukee Magazine

Hi all. I was recently interviewed by Katie (User:Milmag, see her comment at the top) at Milwaukee Magazine, and Wikipedia will soon be the topic of an article in that magazine. Milwaukee Magazine has a fairly large readership, so it'd be cool if we could improve Milwaukee, Wisconsin and Wisconsin by the time the article goes to print. Katie said, "As of now it's slated to run in the City Guide, which hits newsstands in late May and stays through the summer. But I'm pushing for more space, which means it might end up in the regular June issue of the magazine." So we have a little time, but let's get to work! Cheers, all. --Fang Aili 21:02, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Milwaukee flag needed

We need a useable Flag of Milwaukee. The current one will probably be deleted soon. I searched the internet for a .gov source or something non-copyright, but found none. Can anyone help? --Fang Aili 20:03, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Citation style

I was bold and started using the meta:cite citation style recommended at Wikipedia:What is a featured article?. I'm using that as well as Wikipedia:Cite sources/example style to guide my citations. Asthma, a featured article, uses this citation style, so that can give you a feel for what it's like. Also, Seattle, Washington is a city that's a featured article, so that can give us some ideas of what a city featured article looks like. --Fang Aili 19:23, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Music section

I've never been happy with the two paragraphs that address the music scene. Many of the bands/clubs/djs are not really known outside Milwaukee. I'm all for promoting local music, but I'm not sure that this article is the place. Perhaps we can trim this section way down and start a "Milwaukee Music" page? -Nicktalk 23:21, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Looks ok to me, though it could use some cleaning up and elimination of redlinks. The couple (blue)links I clicked on looked like notable enough people. The Seattle page has pretty decent converage of its musical history. I don't know about The Rave, but The Pabst is definitely notable. Who/what specifically shouldn't be there, Nick? Thanks for your input! --Fang Aili 23:41, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
I did a quick edit of the music section, mostly changing the writing style. It still needs a few more fixes, perhaps I'll get to them in a bit. Let me know if you approve. -Nicktalk 19:51, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
I like it. Fewer red links and better written! --Fang Aili 17:02, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Unique History

I'm afraid I'm not well-versed enough in MKE history to write a section with appropriate references, but there is no mention in the article of the 'uniqueness' of Milwaukee's diagonal bridges. This is an extremely interesting part of the history of Milwaukee and I think would be very helpful to be on this page. If someone has a little more knowledge and could maybe point me in the right direction to write a section, I would be happy to do that as well. Thanks.--PaddyM 00:54, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

From this site: "In 1845, Milwaukee consisted of two settlements ruled by two cantankerous pioneers, on opposite sides of the Milwaukee River. As Kilbourntown and Juneautown grew, competition did, too. Byron Kilbourn deliberately set his streets askew from those in Solomon Juneau's settlement, just across the Milwaukee River. When Juneau built a bridge anyway, Kilbourn knocked it down overnight. Eventually, civic order was imposed, but a grid never was. That explains the strange angles of some downtown bridges today." This needs to be re-written to avoid copy vio before inserted into the article. --mtz206 03:08, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Yes, my books contain similar info. Though I think Walker's Point was established by then, too. --Fang Aili 04:17, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
A google search for "Milwaukee bridge war" (no quotes) will yield good results. An information board along the Milwaukee Riverwalk sets the tone and sums it up nicely... 72.131.44.247 06:29, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Milwaukee's Bridge War

The three original founders of Milwaukee each led separate settlements, with the Milwaukee River serving as the key border between them. Solomon Juneau's Juneautown was on the east, Byron Kilbourn's Kilbourntown on the west and George Walker's Walker's Point on the south.

The rivalry between Juneautown and Kilbourntown for settlers and development was particularly bitter. Kilbourn deliberately arranged the street grids on the west so they would never match the grids across the river, causing downtown bridges to cross at an angle to this day.

In May, 1845, hostilities between the two settlements flared into violence. Bridges were dismantled, shots were fired, and more than a few noses were bloodied. The infamous incident, now known as the "Bridge War," helped power a movement to unite the three settlements.

A charter signed on January 31, 1846, unified Juneautown, Kilbourntown and Walker's Point as the City of Milwaukee. Solomon Juneau was elected the city's first mayor.

It should be noted that it was the Milwaukee/Menomonee river confluence, not just the Milwaukee River, which divided all three settlements. Back then the (current) harbor opening and Menomonee River estuary were mostly marshland. 72.131.44.247 06:36, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Tram?

Is a tram (the Milwaukee Connector?) really in the "planning stages"? Has a decision been made to actually build such a system? It has been a few years since I lived in Milwaukee, but the last I remember this was still under great debate, and not quite "planned." If the gov't is actually building this, then it's fine. But if it is still debated whether it should even exist, I think a better phrasing would be something like "The construction of a commuter tram system is currently under consideration" --mtz206 15:14, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

According to their FAQ, yet another "study was launched in October, 2003" and "the system could be under construction by 2008 and completed by late 2009." [1] 72.131.44.247 18:07, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Milwaukee–Waukesha–West Allis?

I've never heard it refered to as "Milwaukee–Waukesha–West Allis metropolitan area". It's always "the greater Milwaukee area". Thoughts? If anything, I think "Milwaukee–Waukesha–West Allis" is just too wordy. And Milwaukee is obviously the largest city in the area. --Fang Aili 14:43, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Another point-- about 22,000 Google hits for "Milwaukee–Waukesha–West Allis"; 168,000 hits for "Greater Milwaukee Area". --Fang Aili 21:46, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

"Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis" is an official Census Bureau designation for the Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) centered around Milwaukee. Since Milwaukee's MSA consists of Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Washington, and Waukesha counties, the official MSA title uses the names of the most-populous municipalities. More detailed explanations, and different break-downs of other Census-defined areas can be found at the Census Bureau's website: http://www.census.gov

Terms like "Greater Milwaukee Area" are not really "official" in any capacity (at least not to the Census Bureau), and so they are considered more informal and sometimes even pretty vague in terms of definition. 172.149.127.33 20:02, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Original entry

Just for historical interest (and grins and giggles) this is the original entry for Milwaukee. We've come a long way, haven't we? --Fang Aili 17:54, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm curious why you felt my GPL'd image of the MAM was a throwaway? I had made a point of filling that request for WikiProject Wisconsin. 72.131.44.247 23:57, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
I just thought the other image is closer-up and brighter. It's not mine; I found it on Commons. --Fang Aili 00:11, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
That's fine.. only reaffirms why some people never bother to contribute anything substantial to the page. 72.131.44.247 00:37, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
I don't understand your comment. It looks like lots of people have been contributing substantially to this article lately. --Fang Aili 14:29, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Boil Water Advisory

Is Milwaukee currently under a boil water advisory? If so, that is news to me. Maybe I just haven't checked the page in a while, but this seems a little outdated since the cryptosporidium outbreak was in '93. Can anyone set me straight on this?PaddyM 02:01, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Definitely not. The crypto thing has been over for years and years. --Fang Aili 說嗎? 03:36, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


Why is Crime info in the race section?

I removed the following paragraph from the "Race and Religion" section of the article:

Crime disproportionately affects many of the city's racial minorites, as many tend to live in higher-crime, low-income neighborhoods characterized by robust gang activity and a strong drug trade. Other issues, such as an underperforming school district and accusations of racially motivated discrimination on the part of the police make race a perennially contentious issue in the city. For example, when Arthur Jones became the first African-American police chief of Milwaukee in 1996, there were accusations that he only received the job because of his race. However, Jones was fired from the department by the city council in 2003 after years of escalating crime. He sued the city for racial discrimination after his firing, but lost. His replacement, sparking another controversy, was white.

No matter what one's opinions are about the link between crime and race, they shouldn't be under the same heading in an encyclopedia article. There is the ongoing debate over the "crime" section, and if someone wants create a well-written non-inflammatory crime section, go ahead. Also, the anecdote about the police chief is unnecessary. These types of incidents happen all the time all over the country. -Nicktalk 04:34, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Agreed --Shawn 06:02, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
I talked it over with Nick, and we agreed that the information should be presented somewhere. I added much of it back in, hopefully with less POV. I didn't know where to put it, so I tacked it onto the end of the history section. Feel free to edit it, subdivide it, move it, whatever you feel is appropriate, I'm not emotionally attached to the section or anything. RyanGerbil10 21:47, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Colloquialisms

Although I don't agree with the one about telling people we live near Chicago, I have to admit that the saying "Up North" is fairly common. Obviously my own personal story is anecdotal, but if I were to ask anyone where, for example, the Dells, is, they will invariably respond "Up North". I'm not saying keep it in, but something to think about. --PaddyM 00:58, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

The Chicago saying seems to be something that a Chicagoan inserted. And while "Up North" is commonly used, it also seems to be inserted with somewhat a derogatory phrasing, plus it isn't necessarily unique or exclusive to Milwaukee. --mtz206 01:19, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
I disagree, while we do say "Up North", but it isn't confined to only Milwaukee. Likewise, I never say I'm going up North when I head out to Crawford County, Wisconsin. --Shawn 02:42, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
I'd like any claims like these to be sourced before appearing in the article. I've never heard of the Chicago thing. I tell people I'm from Milwaukee, and if they don't know where that is, I'll say it's near Chicago. I might say "up north" for a place that's actually north, but not for, say, Madison. "Up north" to me implies a woods-y, nature feel, somplace north where one goes to hunt or fish. (I don't even know where the Dells are; I've never been there.) I agree with Mtz206 about the somewhat derogatory phrasing and it not being Milwaukee-specific. --Fang Aili 說嗎? 02:49, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm not saying it should be back in, but just something to think about. It is definitely something you'll hear everyday, and although I agree with you and mtz . . . ok, I got nothin' at this point except that I love going "up north" when I get the chance. (You really don't know where the Dells are and you've been in MKE for 20 years? You need to take a road trip :)...) --PaddyM 02:55, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, not saying I was disagreeing with you, just speaking my piece. :) I think I went to the Dells once when I was a kid, but I don't remember in which direction we travelled... :) --Fang Aili 說嗎? 03:00, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

I think it's safe to say that Milwaukee, and Wisconsin in general is not the only home to the phrase "going up north." And i think we're all on the same page here. (maybe we should include an article about how the airport call letters are MKE, because that's notable... --Shawn 03:12, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

I took out 'aina' as it is not a local colloquialism. If any place at all, it might belong on the Cudahy page, if any at all. --PaddyM 20:59, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Anyone here heard/use 'The Mil' or 'Mil Town' in reference to MKE? I keep reading that statement and know that neither I nor anyone I know has used either of those two terms. On a related note, does anyone have a reference to the statement about 'young blacks calling their Air Force One's "dookies"'? This is news to me. Cheers, PaddyM 23:05, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Nope, and I don't think the Colloquialisms section should be a place to list every possible nickname for the city. WP is WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information colloquialisms. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 03:58, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Is anyone here who claims to have never heard "The Mil," "Mil Town" or "dookies" young, Black or have any significant connection to Milwaukee's Black community? Didn't think so. I grew up and live on the North Side and have heard (and continue to hear) those terms for a good chunk of my life. Listen to any album from any of the Milwaukee hip hop groups listed in the article and you'll hear all of those terms used several times. I find it extremely ethnocentric and discriminatory to not include them (in a section that specifically states that there are no citations, no less) simply because you don't have connections to the communities which use them. Didn't know that being poor and/or Black made you any less of a Milwaukeean. [Note: pasting the following back into comment later deleted by Illwauk -ZimZalaBim] Then again, I have a feeling that most of the people trying to contribute to this article are a bunch of middle-class whites in the suburbs who want to reach for some connection Milwaukee when they actually have none, but that's another issue [end paste] --Illwauk
Allow me to kindly remind you of the no personal attack policy. Comment on content, not the contributors. Thank you. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 18:49, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
I don't see how anything I said was a personal attack considering I was commening on how users were saying "well I've never heard that used before." Obviously, if someone wants to use their personal experience as a basis for adding or deleting content, then criticism of that experience is fair game.
Well, first, it would help things if you didn't delete portions of your own comments, as you did here when you tried to claim you made no personal attacks [2]. That is disruptive. Second, it is a personal attack because you are commenting/criticizing the nature of the contributer, not their content. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 19:43, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
I love how you claim that the part I deleted was a personal attack when I didn't even mention anyone personally. I simply pointed out reasons for why their experience of Milwaukee was different from mine (this whole article reeks of eurocentrism, excuse me for trying to remedy it). As for what I deleted, I simply decided that particular part wasn't relevent to the point I was making and decided to delete it. But I'd love to hear why you decided to go back and repaste something that you admitted was disruptive. You must want me to get caught up in some kind of conflict. --Illwauk
Update: I added them back and this time gave links to pages that confirm that those terms are used in Milwaukee.--Illwauk

I added an unsourced tag - we need citations for many of the colloquialisms to note that they are (a) used and (b) notable for their use in Milwaukee. This isn't the place for every odd saying uttered by someone in Milwaukee. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 21:10, 9 September 2006 (UTC) Re this edit [3], the burden is not whether one has ever heard someone use the phrase, but whether there are reliable sources indicating that the phrase is a colloquialism in Milwaukee. I've added some sources for the "Tyme machine" reference - but others still lack proper citation. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 16:42, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

So these "reliable sources" are a tounge-in-cheek reference to Summerfest (which attracts thousands of people who aren't from the Milwaukee area) and a car-rental company in the suburbs? Either get some better sources (since apparently we're being extremely anal about what constitutes a colloquailism) or delete the reference.--Illwauk
In what way do these fail to satisfy the WP:RS guideline? --ZimZalaBim (talk) 17:06, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
The fact that none of them actually connect city residents with using the term "TYME machine." If anything, they prove that people in the suburbs use it. But last I checked, Brookfield and Wauwatosa were not Milwaukee.--Illwauk —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.89.100.82 (talk • contribs)

. Stop 'n' go lights? I never heard it in the fourteen years I lived in Mequon. RyanGerbil10(Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 22:08, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Ummm... probably because you live in Mequon, not Milwaukee. - Illwauk
What if Ryan works in Milwaukee? What if he spends 50% of his time there? 60%? 40%? Your apparent "only those who live in Milwaukee should edit" approach is antithetical to what wikipedia is about. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 22:53, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Again, Wikipedia wasn't designed to be a place where anyone can come to edit article of topics they THINK they know a thing or two about. The term "Stop 'n Go lights" is fairly common and if someone isn't spending enough time here to know that and take that for granted (why the HELL is everyone so uptight about the colloquailism section anyway?), then what kind of perspective could they possibly bring? Besides, it's obvious you're only making that "anyone can edit" argument so you have an excuse to be here yourself (couldn't help but notice you referred to Milwaukee as "there").Illwauk 17:29, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia is a wiki - anyone can edit. Wikipedia also requires content to be verifiable with reliable sources. If such a reliable source exists noting notability of this colloquialism, feel free to add it. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 17:35, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Everything should be sourced and verifiable. Illwauk, if you can properly source your assertions there will be no problem. This page is not for accusing people of racism. --Fang Aili talk 23:41, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

And even after I have done so, I have people telling me that (subtley and not so subtley) that they're not "common" enough to warrant being put on the page. BTW, "eurocentrism" doesn't always equate to conscious racism. If that's the connection you made, that's your guilty conscience.--Illwauk

Cream City Text

Hello, I was the one that added the info about the Cream City Nickname. I live in Milwaukee so I know about it but here is a source for more info...[Click here for more info.]

Photo

Is it possible to crop that new image so the focal point is not a picnic table? --mtz206 (talk) 01:38, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Better? I cropped the picnic tables out and some bushes(Im bad at pix so it happens sometimes). --adamb10 22 June 2006

Cool. I owe you a Sprecher. :) --mtz206 (talk) 02:15, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the first opinion, but with different reasoning. The current photo resembles a lighthouse. I have a night pic of the skyline of Milwaukee; I'll put that in. And Sprechers are good. Vote on the pics. The Person Who Is Strange 20:24, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, heres one. File:MilwaukeeNight1.jpg


... and another... File:MilwaukeeNight2.jpg

I have to vote for the first one. It looks more urban. -Nicktalk 05:18, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Nice photos, but I vote for neither right now because they do not specify their source in the description. HollyAm 03:57, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Good point. They look like scans, possibly from books? Until there is source info, these images may be deleted. -Nicktalk 04:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
They are quite grainy... looks like dark noise. People seemed to like the "Dozen Distinctive Destinations" night photo so I may try my hand at something similar. Sulfur 22:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

-why not just use the dozen distinctive destinations image? you could reference their website and the photographer with it.

I put the dozen distinctive destinations photo on the page a while ago; it credited the author, and was licensed as "copyrighted, fair use" as the photo was part of a press release. A wikipedia admin switched the photo in favor of one that was freely licensed. We can either get the author of that photo to release it under GFDL, or have someone take a similar photo. -Nicktalk 23:17, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Whatever we do, we need to replace this one. It's neither a terribly good photo nor an informative representation of the city. --Chancemichaels 00:11, 25 July 2006 (UTC)Chancemichaels


i just posted a new photo that i took this weekend with my digital camera from mckinley marina. --Maximilian77 17:17, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Well done. --MichaelZimmer (talk) 17:22, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Nice shot of the skyline, but the city's a little dark for me. Good composition, doesn't show enough of the city. But much, much closer. --Chancemichaels 13:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)Chancemichaels

Here's my attempt (thumbnail) at recreating the Dozen Distinctive Destinations photo. The Wisconsin Gas Building isn't lit up like it was, and it just doesn't seem to have the same "oomph" as the original though. If there's interest I can upload it. Sulfur 21:19, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I really like your photo, and it should certainly be put up on the page. I think some of the difference in "oomph" is just simple sharpening and color manipulation in photoshop. Here is your photo after a quick unsharp mask and a minor color correction (to remove some of the orange). If you play around enough, you should probably be able to recreate the purple color cast that the DDD photo has. (Here is the same photo in full res.) Nice job! -Nicktalk 22:20, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
That helps... what filter/values did you use for the correction? I'll make the changes and update the file (same link) above. Sulfur 01:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
I like that one. It really captures the spirit of the city's architecture, and it's a well-composed photo to boot. --Chancemichaels 13:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)Chancemichaels

Student population

after noting the total student population from other cities and towns, i recently added the enrollment figures of the listed colleges and institutions of higher education in milwaukee and came to a figure of roughly 115,000 students. as this number probably fluctuates from year-to-year, i noted that the student population of the city "exceeded 100,000" if anyone is curious how i came to this number, here are the stats: uw milwaukee - 28,000 students (undergrad and grad) marquette - 11,500 students alverno - 2,372 students cardinal stritch - 7,600 students medical college of wisconsin - 1,359 students matc - 60,000 students miad - 1,000 students msoe - 2,300 students mount mary - 1,600 students the total came to 115,831 and for wisconsin lutheran college, i could not find recent enrollment figures and so i omitted them from the estimate.

-mm

Milwaukee vs. Wisconsin

I think there should be a section that sheds light on the fact that Milwaukee residents tend to feel as though we have very little in common with the rest of the state. Especially in light of the license plate redisgn in 2001 and the state quarter in 2004. We've all had that moment where we told someone where we were from and had to explain that in spite of being in "America's Dairlyand," that Milwaukee is actually a big city where the culture doesn't begin and end with killing deer and wearing cheese. --Illwauk

  • Although I am often inclined to agree with that sentiment, I don't think it has any place here. I guarantee for the number of people you find in MKE who agree, you will find that number who disagree. Cheers, PaddyM 23:51, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
I think the very fact that neither the Milwaukee article nor the Wisconsin article dwells on hunting or cheese tells readers that there’s more to the city and the state than those two topics. One way to address a stereotype is to simply ignore it. Besides, a fair number of Milwaukeeans do go hunting, and quite a few also commute to Green Bay for the home games, and I’m sure some of them carry Cheesehead hats in the trunks of their cars.
Well I find that a much more effective way to deal with stereotypes is to confront them head on. My point about the cheeseheads is that's pretty much a Green Bay/Madison thing since you don't really see Bucks or Brewers fans wearing them. And where exactly would this "fair number of Milwaukeeans" who go deer hunting reside? Most of Milwaukee is people of color who know better than to go into the northwoods, especially after that incident a couple years ago. And most of the white people who live here stay in "trendy" spots like the East Side, Brewer's Hill and the Third Ward. They tend to consider themselves "true urbanites" and therefore probably wouldn't have any interest in killing animals for "sport." That leaves a very small fraction of city residents who would even be candidates to go deer hunting. The point I'm making is that if you look hard enough you might find some Milwaukeeans who hunt deer the same way you might also find, say, Pittsburgh Penguins fanatics... that doesn't mean that either is a significant part of Milwaukee's culture.--Illwauk
Your rhetoric here appears to be POV and OR, so if it is the basis of your proposed contribution, I'd frown upon it. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 04:01, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
I found news article describing disappointment that the state quarter didn’t depict Wisconsin has cities or didn’t reflect the historical background of its residents, but I didn’t see any of them claiming that the disappointment was part of an underlying disconnect between the urban and rural populations. But if you can cite a good source describing the sentiments of Milwaukeeans regarding their relationship to the rest of the state, go for it. I suppose it should go somewhere in the Culture section.
I was able to find a couple articles that mention the underlying urban-rural disconnect with the state quarter here (http://www.jsonline.com/story/?id=174327) and here (http://onmilwaukee.com/buzz/articles/quarters.html). I haven't been able to find anything on the plates yet, but I remember a couple of my instructors at UWM and MATC had mentioned the Milwaukee vs. Wisconsin undertones of that debate. Unfortunatley, it's kind of hard to cite that online.
By the way, any particular reason you deleted the “big small town” discussion and not any of the 24 others that preceeded it? --Rob Kennedy 05:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
No malicious reason. I'm just new to wikipedia and wasn't aware of some of the "rules" when I did.--Illwauk

The Earlier Milwaukee Brewers and Other Sports Teams

The baseball history listed on the main page is missing the earlier legacy of baseball in the city. The National League had a Milwaukee Brewers in 1878. The American League had one in 1900-1901. Prior to 1900, the American League went under a different name, and the Brewers were present in the team roster of the earlier league going back into the 1890's and 1880's. There was also a Milwaukee team present for a year in either the American Association (the major league that played in the 1880's, not the 20th century minor league) or Union League and probably also one in the Federal League (1914-1915).

Milwaukee also had a football team in the American Football League of 1940, the Milwaukee Chiefs. I believe there was also a basketball team in the 1920's. Though it's no longer widely known, there was a major professional basketball league in the 1920's up to the depression. -- Mark, September 5, 2006

I wasn't able to find any evidence of a Milwaukee team in the Federal League, although I found a couple articles that mention the Milwaukee Chiefs (http://www.footballresearch.com/articles/frpage.cfm?topic=kenosha), (http://www.footballresearch.com/articles/frpage.cfm?topic=afl35-41). -- Illwauk

For The Suburbanites

In light of much of the Black-oriented stuff I posted to the article being deleted as well as a well known colloquaism in Milwaukee being deleted because someone in the suburbs had never heard it, I have to ask that anyone who lives in the suburbs to stop trying to contribute to the article. Those of us from the city aren't trying to to reshape the articles on Waukesha, Brookfield, Mequon, Tosa, etc; so I'm asking nicely to let those of us who actually live here decide how we want our city protrayed.--Illwauk

This is a wiki and anyone in the world can, and is encouraged, to contribute. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 19:24, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
The point of wikipedia is not to have people contribute to articles for which they know nothing about. In other words, just because I CAN contribute to the article about, say, rattlesnakes doesn't mean I SHOULD. If someone doesn't even have enough exposure to Milwaukee to have ever heard it called "Mil Town," (as common as that is) they have no business here. -- --Illwauk
Personal exposure or anecdotal evidence is not the measurement for including (or not) information. citations from reliable sources is. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 22:51, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Illwauk, I have absolutely never heard "Mil town" in the 20 years I've lived in Milwaukee. However I readily conceed the point that I may never have heard it because I've never lived on the north side, where you say this term is common. Just show me a reliable source. This is not about where people are from or where they live--that is absolutely irrelevant. --Fang Aili talk 23:47, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
I still don't know. The Riverwest Current advertising section is not exactly the best reference for a nickname. Do you ask your friends, "What's happening in The Mil (or Mil-Town) tonight?" As someone who actually lived in Milwaukee, and Riverwest, no less, I know I've never used it or heard it. I guess the long-term ramifications of it are zilch, but . . . -- PaddyM 00:59, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Matter of fact, I use it quite frequently and know of plenty of others who do too. In fact, a google search on "Mil Town" gets 7,720,000 hits and you can frequently see the use of "The Mil" in the preview sentences underneath the links. So clearly, there's a significant amount of the Milwaukee community that uses it and definetly enough to warrant it on the page.
Actually "Mil Town" yields about 31K hits, and "Mil Town" plus "Milwaukee" yields about 17K hits. I won't argue the significance of these numbers however; I simply don't need the stress right now. --Fang Aili talk 20:15, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Nicknames

What the heck is "The 414"? The area code, sure, but a nickname for Milwaukee? Sources, please. --Fang Aili talk 23:58, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Area code 414. I used to have that area code too, but since I didn't live in Milwaukee, I'd better not add anything. Heh. (I've heard of TYME machines but not The 414) The MKE sounds like a rip off of Atlanta's "The ATL". Maybe that connects via the Milwaukee Braves. Dual Freq 00:03, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Right, but the city's area code does not make that code a nickname for the city. (And I've never heard of "The MKE" either.) --Fang Aili talk 00:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Agreed - I have also never heard "The 414" or "The MKE". Using the urbandictionary.com does not come up with any relevant sources for these nicknames and I think they should be removed. But, every time I try, they are quickly reverted and I am accused of not living in Milwaukee, despite the fact that I do. --PaddyM 00:53, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
I think this all dates back 10 years or so to west coast hip-hop. Many hip hop songs (particularly old school Snoop and Dr. Dre) refer to "the LBC" (long beach city) or "the 213" (LA's area code). I have no doubt that the MKE/414 is used to refer to Milwaukee; I've also heard similar things from people in Detroit (e.g., "the DET"). Unfortunately, this is a case of the midwest culture lagging behind the coasts--soon it will be on to some new slang. -Nicktalk 01:53, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
The whole area code thing was given a "second wind" (if you want to call it that, assuming it's a trend) by Ludacris' "Area Codes" where he mentions "414" at the end of the song. On top of that, you can go into any Playmakers or Bouchard's and they'll be selling hats with 414 on them (at least they were last time I went, but that was months ago). I'd just like to point out that if terms like "414," and "Mil Town" are inadmissable because they (supposedly) only apply to a few certain communities, then "Tyme Machine" shouldn't be there either because I've never heard anyone from the city use that (I've heard it from people from suburbs and small town up north, but no one from Milwaukee)--Illwauk
I think we should limit the nicknames to ones in common use, not just in hip-hop. --Fang Aili talk 03:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
So now we're at these terms are used, but somehow they're not significant enough because they're hip hop? As if the hop hop community isn't a legit part of Milwaukee (gotta love the subtle racism in all this). I would think that the fact of V100 being the #1 FM radio station in Milwaukee (and has been for quite some time acrroding to the arbitrons), and Late Night Hype being WMSE's longest running program would prove otherwise.--Illwauk
If you'd like to be taken seriously I suggest you quit accusing people of racism. Also, please remember to sign in when posting, if you're going to use an Illwauk signature. --Fang Aili talk 20:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
When people stop acting as if being Black and/or poor and/or part of the hip hop community makes you any less of a Milwaukeean thereby making your the things said in your communities somehow less relevant, I'll stop. But as long as I have solid ground to do so, I'll call that attitude by its proper name(s). As for being taken seriously, It seems that more than a few members apparently already have their minds made up about what I say. I'm not gonna beg for anyone to like me. Either you like what I say, you don't like what I say or you're indifferent to it... simple as that. --Illwauk
I'm a "cracker" (white boy, Tennessee born and bred), even if I do live in the inner city, but I think Illwauk is right on this topic. Hip hop slang in and for Milwaukee is certainly highly relevant in the city with Wisconsin's largest black population! And pointing this out is not a POV violation. For a large part of this city (and not just blacks in the Inner Core either), hip hop use defines common use, is its very essence.Orange Mike 23:20, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Hey Mike. I recognize you from LJ. Glad to see someone like you contributing to the article.Illwauk 23:25, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. I just wanted to give context to the situation. (To be entirely honest, I'm not sure that the colloquialism section is all that notable to begin with.) -Nicktalk 03:56, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Nick - what enclopedic valule does a list of colloquialisms have, anyway? Not a dog 20:23, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

"The 414"

Since one of my contributions has (yet AGAIN) been deleted because my sources apparently weren't "legit" enough (probably becaise they were Black and/or hip-hop oriented, but that's another story), I've taken it upon myself to list TEN references or occurances to someone from Milwaukee (or at least claiming to be from here... this is cyberspace, so you never know) using "The 414." This is probably gonna be annoying and piss some people off, but then, that's how I feel everytime one of my contributions gets deleted.

Please assume good faith. That reference was removed becuase all you provided as a single mention in the lyrics of a single song, which, IMO doesn't merit mention in an encyclopedia article (which I stated in the edit summary). Please don't try to ascribe racism on my (or others') editing actions. If these sources you provide above qualify under Wikipedia's reliable source policy, then I bet the mention of "414" will be kept in the article (but I don't have the time right now to check them myself if they fit with policy - perhaps someone else might).Not a dog 19:57, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I must debunk your sources. Please review the reliable source policy.

--Fang Aili talk 20:42, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

colloquial Main Entry: col·lo·qui·al Pronunciation: k&-'lO-kwE-&l Function: adjective 1 : of or relating to conversation : CONVERSATIONAL 2 a : used in or characteristic of familiar and informal conversation; also : unacceptably informal b : using conversational style

Now I don't know about you, but I'd say that blogs and chat logs qualify as "informal conversation." Not only that, but having a section called "colloquailisms," concedes that what it contains is something that may not be able to be documented. Therefore it is completely ridiculous that we're holding a section on INFORMAL conversation to a standard of FORMAL documentation. Especially when said colloquailism is predominantly used by people who are usually ignored by mainstream sources. On top of that, we have the digital divide, where people of color (especially in Milwaukee) are disproportionatley denied access to the web. So what you're saying is that the phrases used by people whom these things aplly to aren't legit simply because they're poor and ignored? I'm sorry but this "OMG, it doesn't follow protocol" bedwetting isn't gonna fly with me when I've provided MORE than enough evidence from a variety of places to prove that it is in-fact used. Illwauk 22:23, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Dude, thanks! You just made my case for my comment above that colloqialisms don't even belong in an encyclopedia. Delete them all!Not a dog 22:29, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
If I have to go through this much s*** just to have something I KNOW to be a common colloquailism added IN SPITE of all the proof I just found on google, then I agree. Delete the whole thing. Illwauk 22:48, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
I think the important thing to keep in mind is just cuz its on Google doesn't mean its appropriate for this encyclopedia. Wikipedia has specific policies regarding reliable sources, etc. Not a dog 22:50, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
If we were talking about any other section of the article I would agree. But how are logs of informal conversation not reliable sources for a section that talks about words/phrases used in informal conversation? Illwauk 16:50, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Colloquialisms - please comment

We need to come to a consensus: 1) Should there be a section on colloquialisms in the Milwaukee article, and 2) if so, what are the criteria for deeming a colloquialism worthy of being listed?

  • I'll go first. This is a fuzzy issue. I assume this section began because of the only truly unique colloquialism, "bubbler." From there more things were added, but many of them are not unique to Milwaukee (Soda v Pop, Tyme Machine, etc). In addition, Milwaukee is referred to by many names, including The 414, The MKE and Mil Town. But is that noteworthy? Should Waukesha's article list "The 262" as a nickname? Wouldn't almost every major city in the country have a similar nickname? I prefer to avoid this whole mess and suggest that we delete the section. -Nicktalk 01:08, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Probably every major urban city with some presence of hip hop would have a similar name (although "414" isn't strictly hip hop... one of the Brewcity Bruisers girls is wearing a top that says "414" in this week's MKE). So to answer your question about Waukesha, no that probably wouldn't apply. But if other cities having a similar name/phrase was enough to yank something out of the section, we shouldn't have one at all. Almost every city has a place they call "The Strip" (LA and Vegas being the most famous), everywhere has its own name for soft drinks, etc. Illwauk 16:59, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Regarding bubbler, I note that the term is also used Massachusetts[4]. HollyAm 05:00, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
  • I think only those colloquialisms that have been noted in a reliable source (preferably a news report) as being notable for its particular use in Milwaukee. I think "bubbler" and the "soda vs. pop" might qualify. If such sources aren't available, then WP:NOR and WP:NFT should apply. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 01:12, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Agree with ZimZalaBim. Also, nicknames are not quite the same thing as colloquialisms. Or perhaps "nicknames" are a subset of "colloquialisms". Either way, both should be backed up with reliable sources. --Fang Aili talk 16:36, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
  • As I said above, if we're going to have a section dedicated to language used in Milwaukee during INFORMAL speech, then examples of INFORMAL speech online should be able to be used to back in up in the colloquailism section AND ONLY the colloquialism. But what constitutes a colloquailism itself is extremely arbitrary and POV. So unless everything I've said thus far can be agreed to, I say yank the colloquaism section altogether. Illwauk 16:59, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Illwauk and his argument for the use of INFORMAL speech and being able to cite it as INFORMAL use on online. He has stated well above and as well in the talk section about The 414.TheRanger 17:13, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I don't think a seciton on INFORMAL speech appropriate for an encyclopedia article. Go visit Urban Dictionary if you want that. Not a dog 20:30, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
  • I am inclined to agree with FangAli, in that colloquialisms are different than nicknames. I think an 'official' nickname would be something that people across the country would use (e.g., Brew City or Cream City). These nicknames are used by people in historical articles and across the country. Whereas 'The 414' is used in one song. Thats like saying that the nickname for every single city in the country is its area-code - not likely. As far as colloquialisms go, definitely TYME machine, Bubbler and 'soda v. pop' are unique to Milwaukee, but I'm having trouble seeingany of the other ones being used exclusively here. I follow the logic on dookies, but is it not used anywhere else in the country? Cheers, PaddyM 17:25, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I've recently lived in and visited plenty of cities including (but not limited to) Chicago, Atlanta and Baltimore. I also have friends and relatives all over the country and can say with extreme confidence that "Dookies" is uniquely Milwaukee. Air Force One's are one of those things where every city seems to have its own name for them (they're called "Uptowns" in NYC for example). On that same level, TYME Machine is definetly NOT unqiue to Milwaukee. In fact, it wasn't until I came to wikipedia that I even heard of someone from the city using it (although even that's debatable). I'd always associated it with places further north (Oshkosh, Appleton, Green Bay, etc.) since the only people I've heard use "TYME Machine" were students from those areas. Apparently, it's also used a lot in Upper Michigan which is culturally about as far from Milwaukee as anyone can get. --Illwauk 20:15, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
The point here isn't weather you've heard anyone say Dookies or Tyme machine, or whatever anectdotal evidence you want to provide about where you've heard (or not) things said. You are not the measurment required by Wikipedia; reliable sources is. Simple as that. Not a dog 20:28, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
  • I'd hate to see a strict set of guidelines for nicknames and colloquialisms, as there are so many different metrics one can use to gauge their importance. Consensus does need to be reached though, so for "official" nicknames I'd keep them limited to the top three, "Cream City", "Brew City", and "The City of Festivals," as they have a broad historical basis and are used promotionally, in the media, and in common vernacular. If the colloquialisms section continues to be an issue of contention then perhaps it should be removed and given a home on Wikitravel or some such place. My preference would be to keep "bubbler" because it is unique and unusual enough to warrant a mention, along with "Tyme Machine," but I recognize the latter may be more pertinent with certain generations than others. Both "Highway 100" and "Mil Town" are maybes because they have been around for quite awhile, but never really found a place in mainstream use. "Soda" -vs- "Pop" is more of a regional quirk than one for the city. As for "dookies," I recognize that it may be in common use in certain neighborhoods, but question its staying power and ultimate dispersal in to the local language. For now it just doesn't seem to be notable enough. 72.131.44.247 18:40, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
City of Festivals I can see as official, but exactly what makes Brew City or Cream City more "official" than, say, "Mil Town?" Your logic seems to be that people all over the country use them... well if that's so, that doesn't exactly make them "Milwaukee" colloquialisms, does it? And as I said, "City of Festivals" might be an "official" term used by the tourism dept, but when has anyone ever called it that in casual conversation? The other thing I'm concerned about is insisting that all this casual language somehow be documented. Well official documentation is mired in racism and classism being that mainstream sources often ignore the poor and/or people of color. Should these people not be represented on wikipeida simply because they're not the target audeince of some online pulbication? I don't think it's wise to allow that critera here considering that Milwaukee is predominantley poor and people of color. --Illwauk 20:05, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Ok, apparently this is turnig into something else... All I want to say is that I don't think its the job of an encyclopedia to document "casual conversation" whether spoken by a blue, black, brown or beige person, whether from 1st Street or 101st Street. I'll ask again, what' s the value of colloquialisms in the first place. Go to the Urban Dictionary of you want slang. This is an encyclopedia --Not a dog 20:28, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I find it real interesting that you chime in with your "colloquaisms don't belong in an encyclopedia" speeches after my comments, but no one elses. Why is that? Methinks certian people (Notice, I'm not naming names and not limiting this to one person) don't like my edits because they contradict the image of the white-bred, happy days Milwaukee that they'd prefer to have projected on wikipedia, no matter how far from reality that is. --129.89.253.123 16:18, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
I find it real interesting that you are accusing me/others of some kind of bias or racism, adn that almost all yoru comments seem to boil down to that. Not a dog 16:41, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
Funny, I went out of my way to call out anyone personally, yet you took it that way. And I noticed that you didn't even address my concern, but that's not a surprise. I have made numerous edits to this article since coming here and the only ones that are ever debated are the ones that cross racial lines, so you tell me why I would continue to feel that race factors into a lot of people's decisions around here. --Illwauk 22:36, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Not a dog. And I will not tolerate racist accusations. Stop it. --Fang Aili talk 17:12, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
I suggest you learn what racism REALLY is before accusing me of making personal attacks. It goes a lot further than simply calling people names that begin with the letter N. --Illwauk 22:36, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Just to add (and please correct me if I am mistaken) but I think the purpose of this section is to state our positions and work towards a final consensus, rather than reiterate and continue the debate being played out in the other sections. That said, I feel there is a difference between city nicknames and colloquialisms. For official nicknames I say keep only "Cream City," "Brew City," and "The City of Festivals." For colloquialisms, keep "bubbler," "Tyme Machine," and maybe "Highway 100" and "Mil Town"... or delete the section all together if consensus can not be found. My reasoning is given above. I make no decision as to what guidelines should be set fourth for the future. btw, I can login if anyone is concerned that I'm sockpuppeting. 72.131.44.247 21:36, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
  • I Agree with 72.131.44.247. Lets remove anything except for Bubbler and Tyme Machine and Dookies. Hwy. 100 is not notable on an encyclopedic scale. Mil Town and 414 are NN nicknames for the city that are not widely used. Keep "Brew City", "City of Festivals" and "Cream City" due to their historical nature and common-usage. Also, I agree with FangAli and Not a Dog that the racism comments are useless and obnoxious. No one here except Illwauk is making such claims and they're completely out of line. Cheers, PaddyM 18:50, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
What's useless and obnoxious is the idea that certain things aren't good enough for wikipedia because their usage is more common with Milwaukee's Black/people of color populations rather than their white counterparts. I've given plenty of reason for why these things are not doccumented by a "reliable source" (whatever that means) as well as plenty of examples of common, everyday usage that, while not following wikipedia's GUIDELINES (I swear most of the people here need to read up on what that word actually means), testify that beyond a doubt that they qualify as colloquaisms. But I guess it's easier for most to just ignore these things and say "well it's not a problem for most of the people who are here, why should we worry about anyone else?" --Illwauk 22:43, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
  • For my two cents, I would say that we simply get rid of the entire section. I don't think that they're all important enough to be included in the article and have their own little section, but they could be moved to an article dealing with regional vocabularies and accents. Maybe the dialect used in Milwaukee could be described somewhere within an article with a link to more detailed information. I don't know if my opinion really matters since I haven't really contributed much here... and I haven't ever heard the word "Dookie" as describing a shoe in my life. I have heard "Mil town," (Never 414 though... for the area code?) but I agree with 72.131.44.247 in that the famous nicknames should be kept. BirdValiant 21:30, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
Again, I feel compelled to point out that actually living IN the city, and not NEAR it can make all the difference (and does a majority of the time). But why a bunch of suburbanites insist on so heavily editing and policing an article about a city they don't even live in, I'll never know... (well, I do have a few ideas, but saying them might cause a few heads to explode :-P) --Illwauk 22:50, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
For this encyclopedia, where one lives (or who they are) is irrelevant. All we need is verifiability, preferably from reliable sources, and definitely not from original research. (And let's try to keep these allusions to ulterior motives out of it, as we are participating in a civil project where we must always assume good faith.) --ZimZalaBim (talk) 22:58, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
Since you seem to have so many answers, please enlighten me on I assume good faith when I continually see double standards applied to many of the edit's I've made (that's not a sarcastic question, I really want to know)? Also, how do you document things that are used in causal conversation (which is the very DEFINITION of colloquaisms) without using blogs or chat logs? I hardly think mainstream media/research/advertisments, etc. can in any logical way be used to define what is or isn't a colloquaism. --Illwauk 23:06, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Avoiding neologisms

I've suggested above that we need reliable sources for any colloquialism. I think others have suggested to remove them altogether (save for the city's nickname). Others are concerned with double-standards as to what is acceptable, and that the very nature of a colloquialism is that it doesn't have sources. All good points to bring up.

Since we're having difficulty arriving at consensus, a reminder of Wikipedia:Avoid neologisms might prove useful for this discussion. Particularly these passages:

Support for article contents, including the use and meaning of neologisms, must come from reliable sources. Wikipedia is a tertiary source that includes material on the basis of verifiability, not truth. To support the use of (or an article about) a particular term we must cite reliable secondary sources such as books and papers about the term — not books and papers that use the term.
Neologisms that are in wide use — but for which there are no treatments in secondary sources — are not yet ready for use and coverage in Wikipedia. They may be in time, but not yet. The term does not need to be in Wikipedia in order to be a "true" term, and when secondary sources become available it will be appropriate to create an article on the topic or use the term within other articles.
An editor's personal observations and research (e.g. finding blogs and books that use the term) are insufficient to support use of (or articles on) neologisms because this is analysis and synthesis of primary source material (which is explicitly prohibited by the original research policy). To paraphrase Wikipedia:No original research: If you have research to support the inclusion of a term in the corpus of knowledge that is Wikipedia, the best approach is to arrange to have your results published in a peer-reviewed journal or reputable news outlet and then document your work in an appropriately non-partisan manner.

Guidelines seem clear, IMO, that reliable sources are necessary for a neologism, and I think it is reasonable to extend the same logic to colloquialisms. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 23:27, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Again, I feel compelled to point out that guidelines are NOT the same as rules. But regardless, if we're going to insist that every colloquaism be backed up by a "reliable" source, then it shouldn't be here. That leaves the door open for too much race/class bias. --Illwauk 07:11, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Agree - Others can be added later if/when proper references are found. 72.131.44.247 00:06, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
I just added a published reference for "Tyme Machine." I have seen these College Prowler books on the shelves at bookstores. It could also be used as a dual-reference for "bubbler" to save space, but I think the current link for that gives a more complete explanation. 72.131.44.247 02:35, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Strongly Disagree with taking out everything except Bubbler. I too Agree with 72.131.44.247; this section should be limited to historical and documented items only (though I think Hwy 100 would fit that description) that must be backed up with reliable sources (as most items in it are). This section definately adds to the article, and therefore SHOULD NOT be deleted. My two cents, from a proudly born and raised Milwaukeean -- CollegeSportsGuy 22:45, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

KEEP the section, and restore "stop-n-go light". --Midnite Critic 22:58, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Since we can't seem to come to a consensus as to whether or not to keep it, are we taking the Colloquaisms section down, or what? --Illwauk 00:27, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
    • For what it's worth, my two cents is that the section adds nothing to an encyclopedia article and only detracts from more important, noteworthy things about Milwaukee. Some of us Milwaukeeans hold terms like Tyme Machine near and dear to our hearts, but honestly now, who else besides us cares? I would support deleting the entire section. HollyAm 04:44, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I say keep bubbler and TYME, which to me seem interesting enough to include. However I would like them to be worked into other sections, not in a "colloquialisms" section. Like HollyAm said, it's not like anyone particularly cares about colloquialisms, but they can be worked into other paragraphs and be made part of an interesting whole. When looking at various FA cities, I could find no city that had a "Colloquialisms" section. That's not to say that it's impossible or unseemly, just that there are probably better ways of working them in. Boston has a completely separate Boston slang article, (though I don't think we have to go that far), but as far as I have looked, no FA city article mentions slang or colloquialisms other than nicknames for the city itself. --Fang Aili talk 13:48, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I'd be all for that. Perhaps a paragraph on the Culture section talking about how Milwaukeeans use a lot of east-coast diction for being as far west as we are. For example, "bubbler" is prominent in New England, we're the only Great Lakes city that says "soda" and we refer to "subs" instead of "hoagies" or "heroes"(spelling?). Though the latter might be harder to justify since the rise of Subway over the past 20 years has kind of taken some of the regionalism out of submarine sandwiches. I dunno... that's just a thought, but I like the idea of blowing up the colloquaism section to disperse the info throughout the article. --129.89.100.77 22:11, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Milwaukee/Archive_1&oldid=1136368852"