Almost all of these are good, or at least capable of being good. (Though St. Louis sounds rather shitty compared to the rest.) California is more of a genre of toppings rather than a method of preparing a pizza it seems. I don't think it's any more of its own thing than Hawaiian pizza.
I voted Chicago thin. Deep dish loses points for me for reasons of convenience. It takes much longer to bake, it's expensive, and it's not as easily consumed in party settings. Party cut > pie cut. I don't know why people romanticize folding in half a messy slab of grease and burnt cheese. Give me a paper plate and a pile of squares from a party cut any time. Plus, those who want crusts go for the edges, those who don't can take the middle. Everyone wins. I do not have the degree of love for deep dish as most locals. Lou Malnati's rules, but I'm not a huge fan of the other local chains.
NY is not as amenable to a buttload of toppings like either Chicago style is. It doesn't work to load up on sausage, mushroom, onion, and green pepper on a thin crust. Sicilian just sounds like a worse version of deep dish and Detroit, which I don't think is available by me, though some deep dishes sound pretty close.
Now, my trolly opinion: NY pizza is kids food. It's on par with hog dogs, chicken fingers, macaroni & cheese, and PB&J. It's pop music. It's easy. It's comfort food and no one should ever get high and mighty about it, John Stewart.
Edit: Image of Chicago thin. Note that toppings are under cheese to preserve the crispness of veggies and allow for more even browning of cheese without damp spots. Crust should be crisp enough to snap in on the bottom, but thick enough to be chewy.
