Talk:List of cities in Oregon

Lincoln City, Oregon

Lincoln City? Anyone? Anyone? Valfontis (talk) 06:00, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Why are some rows shaded green?

At first, it looks like it is to reinforce the indication of the county seat, but beginning at row 76 Creswell is shaded but not daggered and 77 (Tillamook) is not shaded but daggered. There are more at 99 and 100, 105-106, and 144-145. What's up with these? —EncMstr (talk) 21:27, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

I've dug through the histories: It appears that was General Banzai's and Zzyzx11's intention when the table was first created. Looks like the colors got out of sync with the county seats when a couple of anonymous users added in the 2011 population data. I've corrected the situation. Good catch. — Ipoellet (talk) 01:15, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! It now looks great! —EncMstr (talk) 02:19, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of cities in Oregon. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20161019182931/https://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2015/SUB-EST2015-3.html to http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2015/SUB-EST2015-3.html
• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/699nOulzi?url=http://www.census.gov/geo/www/gazetteer/files/Gaz_places_national.txt to http://www.census.gov/geo/www/gazetteer/files/Gaz_places_national.txt

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 20:21, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Former Cities?

What's with the former cities list? There's no explanation of what it means, few sources, and it contains a lot of cities that definitely still exist. I'm all for just removing it but does anyone have a good argument otherwise? Koricind (talk) 09:54, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Agree, it should be removed, and if ever resurrected, it would be best to be an article of it's own, this is titled the list of cities in oregon, not list of cities and former cities in oregon. Mattximus (talk) 13:33, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Ha ha, years of vandalism, that I am cleaning up now. Always check the edit history. Former cities are just that. Cities that were formerly incorporated. They originally used the loose WikiProject Oregon standard of "if not sourced in the linked article, it has to be sourced in the list". They should probably all be sourced here. In Oregon, cities require incorporation. Any other word by which you want to call a human settlement--community, town, etc.--is not incorporated. Valfontis (talk) 18:33, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Proposed merge of List of cities and unincorporated communities in Oregon with List of cities in Oregon

Unclear why the two articles should be separated if cities are mentioned on both. Unclear why unincorporated communities needs its own list. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 00:03, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Have you checked in with WikiProject Oregon. In Oregon, something called a "city" must be incorporated. In the past, like since 2006, it's been considered useful to have the incorporated cities on their own page. Because Oregon has a lot of place names, it also made sense to have a separate list of basically, "every named human settlement in Oregon notable enough to have its own article" to keep the city article uncluttered, with a sortable table. Can you articulate why you think its a bad thing to have two separate articles besides being "unclear" about it? Have you looked at the other states? In Oregon, "things look different here" (old tourism slogan) in that WikiProject Oregon sometimes does things differently (not always successfully) but is this two-tiered scheme in line with the other states? Its good to be consistent across the project. If Oregon is a complete outlier by having two articles, that might be a consideration. Valfontis (talk) 05:08, 28 October 2024 (UTC)