Template talk:Oregon

Madras

I added Madras as it is one of the fastest growing places in Oregon but also because it is the the County Seat.

Breweries, etc.

I like beer as much as the next person, but do we really need breweries listed at the top of the info box? It's probably time to rethink that whole section. Would it be too boring to list the state bird instead of the state breweries? Also, the Music of Oregon article linked to is kind of a mess, and for the longest time the "Fair" link linked to the Oregon Country Fair and not the Oregon State Fair (until I changed it), for which there isn't even an article. Katr67 09:53, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Standardization of state templates

There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding standardization of state templates (primarily regarding layout and styling) at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. states/state templates. An effort was made earlier this year to standardize Canadian province templates (which mostly succeeded). Lovelac7 and I have already begun standardizing all state templates. If you have any concerns, they should be directed toward the discussion page for state template standardization. Thanks! — Webdinger ^{BLAH | SZ} 22:58, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Topics

things included in the "topics" section seem pretty arbitrary. For instance, I think a link to Government of Oregon could replace several of the other links, and provide access to important gov-related pages that are otherwise not linked. It would be nice if there were a Politics of Oregon page, but nobody's created that one yet. -Pete 23:55, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

They *are* arbitrary. If you look back through the history, and at my comments above, you will see it used to include breweries, the Oregon Country Fair, etc. I tried to add some of the more pedestrian things a random user might want to know about Oregon--bird, flower, etc., kind of following what other states have done. Linking to the government page makes sense until someone is brave enough to tackle the politics page and if there are any other relevant topics, feel free to change the bird and flower stuff. I was just trying to make our infobox less "wacky". Katr67 05:19, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay…I think I'm gonna get bold and revamp some of it. At the moment, I'm thinking the focus is way too much on human settlements - there are 3 sections on cities, counties, metro areas. We need more geography, history, government, flora & fauna…ideas welcome! -Pete 01:27, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Go for it, though if you check out all the state templates, they are all about the cities mostly. Just don't let it get too huge. Also be sure to check out Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. states/state templates for talk about the efforts to standarize the templates. Oh, and uh, this is template, not an article, so it gets the WPOR template template, any reason why you changed it? Katr67 01:45, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

inclusion of cities

What's the basis for inclusion in this template? I specifically ask the question about the cities; they obviously aren't the county capitals, as Tigard and Tualatin are listed (while Hillsboro is the center of the county). --Izno (talk) 10:12, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

portal link?

Shouldn't there be a link somewhere in the template to Portal:Oregon? I considered adding it, but couldn't decide if it should be at the top—where it says "State of Oregon" which has both State and Oregon wikilinked—or in, say, the topics row as Portal or Overview or something like that. —EncMstr 23:22, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Here's the full collection: User:JonMoore/states. Do any of those link to their portal? How do they handle it? Katr67 (talk) 23:58, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Color change

Please discuss changing the color of the template here. Thanks. Katr67 (talk) 17:16, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Use of template

Does anybody watch this page? Let's find out. I'm curious what people think about which articles on which to place this navbox. Personally I prefer to have it mainly on the pages that have links in the template, that is, counties and cities and a few selected topics. Why? Well, it makes little sense to me to have a box that is mainly geographic with a few very general topics on articles that are not geographic (counties and cities) or general. I'm a bit afraid of "box-creep". Other folks seem to think it's fine to add the box to a broader range of articles. Lately the tl was added to a bunch of Oregon-related list articles. I used to remove the box from articles on which I didn't think it belonged (like a minor community) but I won't be doing that anymore. I do, however, tend to like consistency, so perhaps we need a general guideline? I think it's also not a good idea to put the template on those state symbols of Oregon that are also topics of larger general appeal (Western Meadowlark, Coast Douglas-fir, etc.), as that seems a little, um, territorial or something, especially when the other states don't also have their navboxes there. God forbid the meadowlark end up with six state navboxes.* What do other folks think? Are these boxes helpful to our readers, or merely decorative and Oregon-boosting? Katr67 (talk) 20:24, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

*As an aside, I know about other stuff, but I see that Category:Symbols of Oregon was deleted while Montana, Kansas, North Dakota, Wyoming and Nebraska were not...in fact, ours was the only category that was deleted--perhaps we were too thorough in our categorization? I think it's time for an appeal or a mass Afd for the other 49 states (which would seem a bit pointy, I'm sure.) Katr67 (talk) 20:24, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree, the template shouldn't be used on all Oregon-related articles, only on pages that have a link IN the infobox. What other articles would it belong on? (I know it's on others, I'm implying it doesn't belong) I suppose this answers your question about watching it, eh? tedder (talk) 21:19, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Metro vs. City

I am curious why most cities that are part of a metro are not listed in this template. However, this is not true for all cities such as Hillsboro, Oregon, Beaverton, Oregon and Gresham, Oregon which are a part of Portland metropolitan area. Should the cities (e.g., Portland, Oregon) be added or Hillsboro, Beaverton and Gresham, etc. be removed? Similar arguments stand for Prineville, Oregon as a part of Bend-Redmond-Prineville, OR Combined Statistical Area and Woodburn, Oregon as a part of Salem Metropolitan Statistical Area, etc. Thanks. 50.126.125.240 (talk) 18:16, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

For the metros, those largely link to the MSA, where such an article exists. Then as to the cities, those were primarily meant for the larger cities and county seats, but without repeating any cities listed in the metros. The top about 12 most populous cities are represented in the template, but after that there is no real criteria. Feel free to propose one, as we need something to keep it from being a list of all cities. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:19, 7 July 2015 (UTC)