Talk:Raising of Chicago

Chicago Low‑importance

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

Engineering Low‑importance

	Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject EngineeringEngineering articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Section about private homes?

The garden level or garden apartment is practically unknown outside of Chicago, and it results from the redesign of houses forced by the city's raising. Most homeowners could not afford to have a home lifted, as the buildings on this page were, so they built steps up to what had once been the second floor. In homes that are divided up into apartments, this leaves a garden apartment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.76.245.253 (talk) 21:25, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cholera Epidemic Mith?

culminating in the 1854 outbreak of cholera that killed six percent of the city’s population.

That seems to propagate the Chicago 1885 cholera epidemic myth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SCriBu (talk • contribs) 21:51, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's referring to the 1854 epidemic, which really did happen. --Carnildo (talk) 22:15, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Date confusion 1857 / 1858 advertisement in the Tribune.

Well done Manjel on spotting that the date on the scanned image taken from the Tribune doesn't match the date in the WP text I originally wrote. In fact though, the date appearing in the advertisement in the Tribune is the wrong date. The ad first appeared in the Tribune of January 29th, 1858. I suspect a tired and stressed typist had forgotten that the year had just changed -- it was still only January after all. jonathan riley (talk) 01:09, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

'One source' tag.

I took off M0rphzone's "One source|date=August 2013" tag, as there was no way for me to ascertain how many sources is a sufficient number. Tag causes text to show on article page: "[...] Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page [...]", yet there is nothing on the talk page about the number of sources. Well, at least until now.
jonathan riley (talk) 04:10, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Usually articles should have at least 5 different sources that are not from the same website, resource, book or company. In this case, there are only 1 or 2 sources being used with the majority from the Chicago Daily Tribune. Since this is a topic from the 19th century, there are few reliable sources available, so it may be ok but it's generally more helpful to have a wider variety of sources. - M0rphzone (talk) 20:44, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your courteous reply M0rphzone. The article now a total of six text based sources, as well as images.
jonathan riley (talk) 21:28, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Removing "One source" tag again. Article has ten named sources:
Chicago Tribune
Putnam's Monthly
Emmett Dedmon's book
Besse Louise Pierce's books
David Macrae's diary
The Times (of London)
Daily Alta California
Weekly Placer Herald
Sturgis' dictionary
Mendel's lithograph
as well as the unattributed lithograph image of the raising of the Briggs House. Jriley (talk) 00:36, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dead links

All the links associated with the site http://users.ox.ac.uk are dead. 03:23, 6 July 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SittingDuckCasting (talk • contribs)

commons-cat

- still missing? --Itu (talk) 06:08, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Section needed on the technical aspects

It's mentioned in all articles on this subject that jackscrews were used, but it's never mentioned the technical aspects of how they were installed under the buildings. Can someone cite some sources on this and add that information? The "How" is missing proper explanation, and perhaps mentioning the system of foundations for how these early brick buildings were built would be helpful to that explanation. Criticalthinker (talk) 10:54, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]