Talk:Wolf Point, Chicago

Location of Chicago's original Native American trading post

Is there a better source for this? It is only mentioned in the short paragraph that the CBS article (ref 2) gives over to history; I'm fairly sure that the journalist of this article did minimal historical research and that this is probably copied from a press release, or something similar. None of the other sources cited thus far mention Wolf Point as the location of Chicago's first Native American trading post. I would have thought that this appellation would be given to Jean Baptiste Pointe du Sable's cabin at the mouth of the river. Without another source giving more information (names & dates) I think that we should remove this fact from the article. —Jeremy (talk) 13:48, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

• How about instead of removing it we say, According to a local CBS journalist or something?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:04, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
  • I'm just not sure that the journalist is a particularly accurate source. He/she devoted 38 words to the history of Wolf Point and it reads a bit like the boiler-plate text that companies often put at the end of their press releases. It is unclear to me whether the journalist is referring to Wolf Point in the specific modern sense or the wider historical sense, or even if he/she knew that there was more than one sense. If the specific sense, then the first thing that I can find recorded on the land on the north bank is Miller's cabin, which is never mentioned as a trading post. The Scharf map [1] marks a few locations as 'Indian Trader' or 'Trading Post', but none of these are at Wolf Point. Whilst the CBS reference is fine for the 2007 development plans (though perhaps the Crain's Chicago Business article that the CBS journalist refers to is sufficient for that), I don't think that it should be used for any historical material.—Jeremy (talk) 14:27, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
    • I personally would not remove it, but will not object to or revert a removal.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:58, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

As far as I can tell from the history books and historical journal articles in Chicago that I have looked at, the chronology of early non-native activities around the mouth of the Chicago River and Wolf Point goes something like this: Jolliet and Marquette, though probably not the first Europeans to visit the area, are the first recorded to have visited the Chicago River in 1673. Marquette returned in 1674, camped a few days near the mouth of the river, then moved on to the portage, where they over-wintered. Two of LaSalle's men over-wintered at the portage in 1682. There is a myth of a fort at Chicago in 1685, but there is no evidence that this ever existed. The Mission of the Guardian Angel was established somewhere in the vicinity of Chicago in 1696, but no one really knows where—some sources speculate that it was on the Chicago River, but others place it in Skokie. Pilette de St. Ange and his wife may have lived at the mouth of the river in about 1765, but again no one knows where. A trader named Guillory might have settled near the Chicago River in around 1778, and I suppose that it is possible that his is the trading post referred to in the CBS article. In Checagou: From Indian Wigwam to Modern City Milo M. Quaife recounts that in 1818 Antoine des Champs showed Gurdon S. Hubbard the remians of a corn field supposed to have been cultivated by Guillory, and in 1823 a government expedition used the name Gary River to refer to the north branch of the Chicago River, suggesting that Guillory's property, if it existed, had been on the north branch (so perhaps at Wolf Point). But to me, this does not look like enough evidence to say with certainty that the first trading post was at Wolf Point. The first settlement that anyone can definitively place (both in date and place) was Pointe du Sable's trading post, which he may have established at the mouth of the Chicago River some time before 1779, but was definitely there from about 1784 until he sold it in 1800. The CBS journalist doen't cite their source, and I cannot verify their claim in any other source, so I am going to remove this information from the article.—Jeremy (talk) 16:03, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

• You are a bit of an expert on the subject. Do what you think is best.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:28, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Railroad tracks

I made some minor changes before realizing the GA review was in progress, Sorry.

I have one, hopefully, minor question, the map shows railroad tracks on the west bank but no mention is made of them, today, in the article. Have they been pulled up? abandoned? A review of satellite photos clicked through the coordinates link suggests they may still be in use by ?. Perhaps they still deliver to some building or are used as side rails? Thanks. Alanscottwalker (talk) 15:48, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

These are the north entrance to Union Station—used by Metra and Amtrak.—Jeremy (talk) 19:28, 23 November 2010 (UTC)