Talk:Union Stock Yards

Does merging Union Stock Yard Gate into Union Stock Yards seem sensible to others?

• The topics are intimately linked
• Few articles link to the Gate article; increased likelihood of articles linking to Yard article
• The content in the Gate article supports notability of the Yards
• The expanded Gate content could become the first section after the intro OR a standalone second paragraph in the intro.

Thoughts? ChicagoPimp 17:03, 7 March 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

• Comment Since the gate is by itself on the National Historic Register, it should have its own article. This week's CHICOTW article should have a section less detailed than the article with a section hatnote pointing to the main article. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 17:47, 7 March 2007 (UTC) [reply ]
• I agree with Tony. TheQuandry 16:16, 8 March 2007 (UTC) [reply ]
• I agree for the same reasons. I've removed the tags; this is obvious. The gate deserves to be categorized & linked by itself. I don't think the Yards need a notability boost; they were world-famous. -- Dhartung | Talk 07:51, 22 March 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

This week I think a viable DYK factoid would be "DYK that into the early 1900s and peaking in 1924, more meat was processed at Union Stock Yards than in any other place in the world." TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 17:49, 7 March 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

Given the extent of the article at the start of the CHICOTW period, we have to be sure to make extensive changes to be eligible for DYK. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 19:11, 9 March 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

The historic stockyards were also the inspiration for the naming of the Chicago Bulls NBA basketball team. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.65.140.36 (talk) 19:45, 19 June 2013 (UTC) [reply ]

The article states, "By 1900, the 475 acre stockyard contained 50 miles of road, and had 130 miles of track along its perimeter.[6] At its largest size of 475 acres, The Yards covered nearly a square mile of land, from Halsted to Ashland and 39th to 47th Streets"

If the largest size was 475 acres, why is it mentioned twice? Or was it even larger? Also, a square mile is 640 acres, so 475 acres comes up about three-fourths of that. If someone could clarify those acreages, then I'd be ready to pass this article for GA. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 23:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

Will check ASAP TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 06:56, 26 April 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

i believe i added the square mile text including the streets, so i'll look for that reference. ChicagoPimp 15:17, 26 April 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

Now that the 475 acre versus one square mile issue is resolved, I'm giving this the Good Article stamp. It's well-written and comprehensive and tells the complete history of the stockyards. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 18:48, 28 April 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

How did this compare with other stockyards in Chicago, assuming there were any others? How many animals were slaughtered here over its entire history? These facts, if known, should be in the article. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 18:50, 4 May 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

i was wondering that did anyone died from working too hard or so for the union stock yards? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daisy8976 (talk • contribs) 19:12, 2 January 2010 (UTC) [reply ]

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink }} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and careful attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 02:23, 4 July 2008 (UTC) [reply ]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Union Stock Yards. 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:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090520055326/http://encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org:80/pages/647.html to http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/647.html

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) 18:23, 20 July 2016 (UTC) [reply ]