Talk:Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis and Omaha Railroad Car Shop Historic District

National Register of Historic Places Low‑importance

	National Register of Historic Places portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places 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.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wisconsin Low‑importance

	Wisconsin portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wisconsin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Wisconsin 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.WisconsinWikipedia:WikiProject WisconsinTemplate:WikiProject WisconsinWisconsin articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

q about source, and development? edit

Latest comment: 1 year ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Hi, User:Znns, this new article popped up on my notifications, and I see that it looks like a reasonable article topic, etc. It doesn't cite any sources though, besides the NRIS database (which I believe is not your only source for the statements in the article). Could you please describe and/or point to the source(s) you actually are using? sincerely, --Doncram (talk,contribs) 02:22, 15 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

I cannot speak for the article creator, but putting on my NPP hat this appears to pass WP:GEOFEAT by being on the NRHP. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 02:26, 15 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

I did not say the topic is not notable. It probably is notable; I believe there exist substantial sources which could be used. But several of the fairly minimal statements in the article are not supported by the NRIS source (the one source when I commented before) nor by the Wisconsin source subsequently added. I suppose I could add more negative tags to the article, and modify the one tag which currently states that proper source(s) have been identified at the Talk page, which is false. This is perhaps all a bit silly: if the article creator asked, or otherwise showed interest in improving the article, I and others could help them add a NRHP document source and perhaps other sources, and to develop it properly. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 08:12, 19 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

I went ahead and added the standard NRHP reference and filled out the article with info from that reference. --Jeff the quiet (talk) 13:34, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Add topic