Jump to content

Talk:Lisle, Illinois

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

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Juancontreras2.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:40, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Schools

[edit]

Some of Lisle also falls in the Downers school district (Downers North, I think). Specifically parts of the area east of Rt. 53 and south of Maple. I don't know the district number or any of that, so could someone help? -Rrius (talk) 22:03, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Green Trails is Naperville's school district. However I am pretty sure there are no Downers Grove school districts in Lisle. The Back-end of the Meadows past 59th is Woodridge, and that is Downers Grove. Tssteele (talk) 03:28, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

History

[edit]

I suspect the claim: "This early beginning makes Lisle Township the oldest settlement in DuPage County." It is earlier stated that Lisle was "settled in 1832 after the Blackhawk War". These two statements do not jive with the statement on Wikipedia's Naperville, IL page that says: "In July 1831, Joseph Naper arrived at the banks of the DuPage River with his family and friends to found what would be known as Naper's Settlement." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.7.165.131 (talk) 00:23, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Township vs. Village

[edit]

The Village of Lisle and and Lisle Township are two different things. North8000 (talk) 02:39, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Further clarifying, in Illinois, townships are geographic areas (often a 6 mile by 6 mile square) that the state (and each county in the state) is divided up into. Most (probably all) have a governmental body which fulfills certain functions and provides certain services, albeit much more limited than a municipal or county government. These services become a little broader and more relevant (e.g. snow plowing of local roads) for residents that don't live within a municipality (city, town, village) which provides those services. For example, the large adjacent city (Naperville) resides in several townships, Lisle Township and Naperville Township being just two of them. And, to emphasize the distinction, more Naperville residents live in Lisle township than live in Naperville Township.  :-) North8000 (talk) 10:55, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I found a source (see Bibliography) supporting the statement you put under quotes.--96.255.26.152 (talk) 23:18, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of historic people

[edit]

Several people with notable places in Lisle history were just removed from the notable people list with edit summary saying that they are not notable outside of Lisle. Maybe they were in the wrong section but they should be retained in the article. I might try to do something with that, but the person who originally put them in could do a better job at it. Possibly start as a list of historic figures, and then try to morph it from a list into paragraph type material. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 12:00, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So far, there is nothing to justify including them in the article. "So-and-so owned such-and-such establishment" is not sufficient reason to include someone in the article. If you find something about them that actually is important enough to telling the story of what Lisle is or has been for inclusion, then write it up with a source. -Rrius (talk) 02:48, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is not my material, I just watch and occasionally try to help on the article. You are mixing two things together there. If someone questions unsourced material, they can tag it. However there is no such thing as an "important enough to telling what Lisle is or has been" criteria for inclusion of material in an article. Notability is a criteria for article existence, not content existence.
On the one particular point, owning or operating a toll road (parts made up of planks) which was a segment of a ~1,000 mile long road as it passes through what is now Chicago suburbia is certainly suitable material for this article. I support a editor putting this back in if they care to do so. North8000 (talk) 11:19, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not confused about anything. First, unsourced material can be simply removed. Using fact tags is a way of letting plausible information stand while noting the lack of a source. I am perfectly willing to accept that Beaubien did what you claim, but to suggest that anything he did was actually important would require a source. Second, I was very careful to avoid using the word "notable" precisely because I am aware that notability is an article standard, not a content standard. Nonetheless, not all material is sufficient relevant to warrant inclusion. It is true that there is a law firm in Lisle called Hinshaw and Culbertson; is that sufficiently important for inclusion? It is true that there is a Jewel-Osco on the corner of Maple and Rt 53; is that important enough to be included? It is true that that Jewel sells Oreo cookies; is that sufficiently important to be included? WP:Notability may not be the relevant standard for judging whether something is sufficiently important, but that doesn't mean there is no standard at all.
Your attempt at justifying the material is to say that the fact of a person's having operated a segment of a road is "certainly" worthy of inclusion. If it is so certain, please explain why. There is nothing in the article to explain why the road was important, let alone why the identity of its owner is. While the road itself may well be important (though something more than ipse dixit is necessary before including it), you have identified exactly nothing that explains why the identity of the road's operator in Lisle at one given point in time is itself important. -Rrius (talk) 05:07, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Asides: I am not claiming that Beaubien did anything. That is not my material. If it was, I would have already put it back in, but changed into historical content rather than as a listing for the individual. Second, I did not say that you were confused, I said "You are mixing two things together there". Further clarifying, I meant that you were blending those two considerations in a way that confuses the statement and reader, and which incorrectly implies that someone needs sourcing-proved importance in order to include material in the article.
There is no "importance" criteria for inclusion of material in an article as you are implying. As long as something does not violate content policies (e.g sourcing if challenged), the norm is, based on consensus, whether it is interesting or useful enclyclopedic information on the topic for a typical reader. I think that the three examples that you gave (the law firm, the store, and the cookies they sell) would all fail that criteria. North8000 (talk) 10:25, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Recently many internal links on years were added. I don't seen the value on this, and it appears to be overlinking. Sincerely North8000 (talk) 18:14, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

[edit]

So, the picture for an article on a Chicago-area midwestern town is one of a cactus? !  :-) North8000 (talk) 11:49, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did you click through to read what the Morton Arboretum is? It has over "4,100 different species of trees, shrubs and other woody plants from around the globe", including many cacti. It's a huge attraction for the area, so highlighting its unique character in a picture for the town seems appropriate to me. --Dkriegls (talk to me!) 20:20, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I know all about it. A picture from that article might be more representative. IMO a cactus is not representative of it much less the village. North8000 (talk) 20:30, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, there should be a section on the Arboretum where that pic would be more appropriate, and the info box pic should be of the village center --Dkriegls (talk to me!) 20:41, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Lisle, Illinois. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 21:21, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lisle, Illinois. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 03:57, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lisle,_Illinois&oldid=1203615247"