Talk:Keep Portland Weird

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedy deleted because... -- Keep. It is a new article that should have some time to be expanded, not immediately deleted. The subject is noteworthy, refer to Keep Austin Weird as a comparison.Northamerica1000 (talk) 09:39, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Delete or Merge Even far more notable slogans such as "Be All You Can Be" and "Only You Can Prevent Forest Fires" do not have their own article. This slogan should be included in an Oregon Slogan page or a business revitalization page, which should also include the Austin slogan, since this appears to be national (and possibly larger) phenomenon. Some additional Oregon slogans from the Oregon Department of Transportation page that do not have there own page are:

• 1913 - "Get Oregon Out of the Mud"
• 1957 - "Building Oregon Thru Better Highways"
• 1958 - "Oregon Freeways. ..Symbol of 2nd Century Progress"
• 1961 - "Freeways are Easier"
• 1967 - "Fifty Years of Building Better Highways in Oregon" (not technically correct; the department was formed in 1913)
• 1978 - "Keep Oregon Green and in the Black"
• 1986 - "ODOT on the Move"
• 2006 - "The way to go!"

I imagine at the time these slogans were being promoted there were signs and bumper stickers of them. Recently the "Flex Your Power" campaign has been widespread in California. This slogan is quite well known among the general populace of California. It does not have its own page, nor should as it does not have widespread notability and will likely become historically obsolete (as the above slogans arguably are). Currently I do not see how this article represents a lasting world view or even a national view of the subject. This topic, as an independent article, might be better suited for, http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Main_Page. Lastly one sentence mentions that there is controversy regarding the topic, but then almost no details reference the opposing view. At the very least this article is not neutral and seems to violate the Wikipedia:Advocacy policy. This opposing view should be expanded on if the article is to remain. Legion211 (talk) 18:58, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Actually, despite the article creator's plea, the talk page isn't the place to have a deletion discussion, which took place here (see also the template at the top of this page). The result was that the article will be kept. You can read more about deletion here. Thanks for your comments though. You might want to read WP:OSE about the notable slogans that don't have pages. I don't believe the ODOT slogans were bumper stickers, nor are they notable enough for articles of their own. Mention on the ODOT page should be enough. Feel free to add cited information about the opposing views. Thanks! Valfontis (talk) 19:19, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

• I left my opinion here due to the delete discussion page being closed. Thank you for taking the time to respond to my post and for the additional info. I was unaware of the OSE page, that did help to clarify. I will try to expand on the opposing view. Have a great day! Legion211 (talk) 17:01, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

No rationale for speedy deletion

The criterion used for deletion are not inherent in the article. The following criterion Criteria for speedy deletion A7 - "The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines." is being used, while in the article there are claims of significance and importance. Northamerica1000 (talk) 09:46, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Actually I see why it was being speedy deleted - would it be possible for you to show us the notability of this article? Not sure how this bumper sticker slogan meets any of are criteria for an article.Moxy (talk)

Contested deletion

Keep. The rationale being used for speedy deletion are not inherent in the article, the noteworthiness of the article is stated in the article. Refer to Keep Austin Weird as a comparison. Why should Austin's article remain and Portland's be speedy deleted? A logical fallacy. Northamerica1000 (talk) 01:02, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Other stuff exists.Moxy (talk) 13:33, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Sources

• http://www.portlandtribune.com/news/story.php?story_id=124467003024441500
• http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2010/02/keep_portland_weird_makes_sens.html

--Another Believer _(Talk) 03:46, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Section names

"Weirdness" was the best I could think of, but it isn't formal enough. If someone can think of something better, please change it. Thanks. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 00:53, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Considering there's been a measure of weirdness, I'd say it's appropriate. tedder (talk) 20:04, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Keep Oregon Green

Another notable, and far more widespread slogan, especially back in the dark ages. It sounds like the Austin slogan is what inspired the Portland one, but "Keep Oregon Green", I believe, predates many such slogans. Might be worth a mention if any sources bring it up. Valfontis (talk) 19:03, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

It's from 1941, apparently.[1][2] - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 19:18, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Keep Oregon Regular

Portland's food vendors' too-cozy proximity to sewage pumps

Visitor7 (talk) 22:29, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

What's your point? --50.137.171.62 (talk) 21:24, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Tree-lighting bomber

Recent potential threats have prompted local officials to reconsider joining the task force. No mention of the tree-lighting bomber in the article or the conspiracy theory that it was staged to force Portland back in the task force? --50.137.171.62 (talk) 21:26, 25 March 2012 (UTC)