Jump to content

Talk:Munster, Indiana

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

need help!

[edit]
  • I would like some help on making this website look and feel right! The information already added is correct but the site doesn't look right. I've tried to make Munster, Indiana site look like the Griffith, Indiana site, but It didn't work... Please check out Griffith, Indiana and if someone knows how to make it similar that would help!!! Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

Education

[edit]

Not necessary or relevant to list various colleges that some MHS graduates have gone to in a general-purpose article on the Town of Munster. Also unsourced. Xenophon777 (talk) 19:06, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edits of Nov 13, 2008

[edit]

The Bailly information is of little relevance specifically to the history of the Town of Munster. The Stahlbohm information, while I believe it to be true, is unsourced, and out of place -- a non sequitur -- in the place where it had been inserted. The Wikilink on the second reference to the Little Caluemt River was removed pursuant to Wikipedia policy of using the links only onthe first occurrence of a name. If an editor can work the Stahlbohm information in in a more relevant way, with cites, it would presumably be a welcome addition. (I don't mean to be as critical as this must sound...) Xenophon777 (talk) 02:09, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Undeveloped Lake"

[edit]

I propose modification of the following sentence, which is in the body of the article at the moment: "The town's boundaries contain three small lakes, one of which, located within Centennial Park, is marshy and undeveloped." At one time the lake within Centennial Park was, indeed, marshy and undeveloped. (Those weren't my words.) However, the Park, including the lake within its boundaries, is now developed. Specifically, I propose eliminating the words "one of which, located within Centennial Park, is marshy and undeveloped." Any thoughts? Xenophon777 (talk) 14:11, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Affluent, Schmaffluent

[edit]

Whether Munster is an "affluent" town or not, it's an instance of puffery, even if it were cited. What does "affluent" mean? More affluent than...? The word adds nothing to the article. It's best left out. Xenophonix (talk) 21:04, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Following recent edits concerning income, someone needs to check for cites to what the correct figures should be... what the previous editor had shown or what the most recent editor had put up. Xenophonix (talk) 23:56, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Company listings

[edit]

Do all businesses in the town need to be (or have the right to be) listed, however local in focus or lacking in greater notability? Can I list my mechanic? This isn't the Yellow Pages. On notability and “What Wikipedia is Not” grounds, how about we remove all business listings which do not have their own Wikipedia articles? Xenophonix (talk) 23:53, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. We definitely don't need to write every business that operates in Munster. There are a couple that should be kept which are important for Munster and the region as a whole, however; Three Floyds Brewing -- popular microbrew and nationally acclaimed, Times distribution center -- regional importance?, Community Hospital -- isn't it one of the 50 best hospitals in America? (saw the billboards advertising it everywhere; need citation for it), and PepsiCo? (all of these should be moved to a respective #Economy section which has yet to be written) --ddima.talk 17:20, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lot4 park west.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Lot4 park west.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:57, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lot 6 park west.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Lot 6 park west.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:57, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Midcentury modern Hill and Vale.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Midcentury modern Hill and Vale.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:57, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Munster Community Hospital?

[edit]

Does anyone think it would be good to mention something about Munster Community Hospital in the article? Seeing as it has been the only Indiana hospital to be named to America's 50 best Hospitals, for the past 4 years in a row. I just feel that Community Hospital can be seen as an important aspect of the town. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mortiz93 (talk • contribs) 21:03, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Munster, Indiana. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:23, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Centennial Village

[edit]

This is what I posted:

"In the land once occupied by Munster Steel (which has since relocated to Hammond, IN)[1], a new upscale mixed-use lifestyle center named "Centennial Village" will begin development at the end of 2015. Adjacent to Centennial Park to the south, the development will include 14 buildings, including the upscale SpringHill Suites hotel, retail outlets including space for an upscale grocer, and high-end multiunit housing with underground parking.[2] This project is part of the larger 45th Street/Calumet Ave underpass and realignment project in which Phase 1 (45th Street) includes extending 45th St east into the Centennial Village development with two new stoplights and creating an underpass under the CN railroad tracks to align with 45th St at Columbia Ave. Phase 2 (Calumet Ave) includes creating an underpass at Calumet Ave.[3]"

All of this information was based upon articles that have been published and I provided the sources. This was not meant as a "promotion or advertisement" but more so to include information on current developments in the town. The West Lake Corridor extension in Munster is a section on the page that has remained (and even has its own page dedicated to it). But why is it that that can remain but Centennial Village cannot when development is beginning? The development at Lake Business Center is not complete yet, but that remains on the page as well. I believe that the Centennial Village development should be included on the Munster, IN page as a proposed development. It is very common on many page on Wikipedia to have proposed developments listed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.205.53.255 (talk) 03:38, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The language is entirely promotional (upscale, multiple times; high-end; the grand prize winner--upscale mixed use lifestyle center). This is so obviously nothing but promo, I don't need any other arguement to keep it out. But here are the other arguements anyway. Wikipedia is not a newspaper. Altho there are exceptions, this isn't one. We only cover developing stories after they play out. Further, we write to a worldwide audience. Do you really think people in Bhopal give a damn that they are building apartments, a motel, and some stores in a brownfield somewhere in NW Indiana, a place covered in brownfields? How does it matter that it is between 45th, Columbia, Calumet, and the CN? Again this stuff only matters if you are promoting this development. Finally, OTHERCRAPEXISTS is never a valid arguement here. There are nearly 5 million articles on English Wikipedia, all written, patroled and maintained by volunteers. We are not getting paid to create an encyclopedia. Are you getting paid to promote a real estate development? John from Idegon (talk) 05:04, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That language is what has been used to describe the development. I am not getting paid to promote any real estate. I understand that this is a page that the world can see (such as any website) but at the same time, most people looking at this page would be those interested in the area. If someone from Bhopal was not interested in Munster, why would the page interest them? What if the words "upscale" were removed? Would that make it better? Also, saying "give a damn that they are building apartments, a motel, and some stores in a brownfield somewhere in NW Indiana, a place covered in brownfield" sounds like you have a personal problem against the area and personally do not want to see ANYTHING positive about any NWI area. In addition to this, you ask "How does it matter that it is between 45th, Columbia, Calumet, and the CN" because you think it only matters if the development is being promoted...IT MATTERS because the 45th/Calumet intersection is known to be one of the most congested intersections in NWI and the Centennial Village development pretty much goes hand-in-hand with the underpass development. Lastly, you asked me to stop "warring" and to use the talk page, which I did because that is the appropriate thing to do. But YOU are being extremely disrespectful in your tone and just come off sounding like a hater.76.205.53.255 (talk) 10:54, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I can see how this could be puffery with the amount of times upscale has been listed. Perhaps a brief mention could be made and then when the project actually happens, more detail can be included. If we listed all prospectives projects, wikipages would be out of control. IMO, this project should be mentioned but not to the extent of the original posting.166.175.57.36 (talk) 19:42, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as WP:CRYSTAL. Maybe when it happens, but I really do not see it then either. A town got a new motel, some stores and an apartment building. Hardly worthy of an encyclopedia. Perhaps if someone would want to take the time to actually research and write on commercial migration, brownfield redevelopment, etc, instead of writing this promo crap.... John from Idegon (talk) 20:35, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Such a negative weirdo. Bye loser go do something else 2600:1008:B0AC:52AC:D43F:5445:2727:C93C (talk) 16:57, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with 76.205.53.255. This is an important development to the town of Munster and it's inclusion is warranted. This development has been talked about in local and regional politics for many many years and will be a major economic growth to this community. Just because this seems minor information to you, doesn't mean that its inclusion is unwarranted. Of course, the tone should be neutral at all times, however, if it is properly cited and sourced, the information deserves to be included.
Your argument that someone from Bhopal would not be interested in this goes completely against what Wikipedia stands for. We are an encyclopedia of knowledge, no matter how meaningless or important; what is important to one person, is completely irrelevant to another. I can go through our 5 million articles and find numerous examples of very large and extensive city and community articles which go way beyond in their details about their area than this paragraph which you oppose to include. Simply speaking, take a look at WP:NOTPAPER. I will take the initiative to include further citations and relevant information to this content in an encyclopedic tone. § DDima 23:56, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Munster, Indiana. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:51, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

I'm very annoyed that you terminated my search since recently I made a generous contribution to wikipedia. Don't you guys keep track of who are paying members? 2601:249:1001:2820:114A:A7B1:B377:CE0F (talk) 05:11, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Munster,_Indiana&oldid=1202241759"