Talk:Portland, Oregon/Archive 1

being a one-foot diameter circle, its "acreage" is only about 0.3 square metres

Those numbers don't match. One foot is 30.48 cm, so the area of a one-foot diameter circle is about 900 cm^2*0.7854, or 0.07 square meters. -phma

The diameter was wrong. The city web site says it's 452 in² which corresponds to a two-foot diameter circle. That means the diameter is 60.96 cm so π×30.48² = 2918.64 cm², or about 0.3 m². (whew!) --Nate 19:03 Nov 27, 2002 (UTC)

Contents

I was reading through the table of contents for this article, and it pretty much sums up Portland: Parks, Beer, Public Transportation. :-) --Nate Silva 22:05, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Famous Portlanders

Okay, I'm giving fair notice that a few names have slipped into this list who I do not consider Portlanders, & whom I will be removing from this list. It's not because one has to possess a certain modicum of elitism to be on this list -- it's just that some folks don't have a true connection to this town.

• Paul Allen - So he owns the Trail Blazers. BFD, they've sucked almost to the day he wrote the check. Otherwise, his involvement in Portland has been less than minimal. Seattle can have him.
• Ward Cunningham - No disrespect to Ward (I've met him, he's a nice guy), but does he live in Portland or across the hills in Washington County? -- Ward & Karen have a Portland address, but with respect, I wonder if Ward is notable outside Wiki fame. Should be, perhaps, but ...? User:gnetwerker Feb 13, 2004
  • Well, the rule I've always heard is when in doubt, include it. Since Ward does have a Portland address, I have no problem putting him back in the list.
• Dr. Frank Stearns Giese - Portland State University professor convicted of Conspiracy for January 1973 military recruiting station bombings.

This is a little odd - This entry, as well as the mention in the "city nicknames" section about "City of Bombs", seems to be part of a poorly-executed disinformation/propoganda effort. I have only been able to find mention of Portland as "City of Bombs" on a lot of identical bot-entered forum posts, and at least one site which seems to be a fake blog with one entry on it and some fake comments, aimed at characterizing the Earth Liberation Front as a terrorist organization. Anybody else for expunging it? I don't think the guy who put Dr. Giese in this list realized that the original author of the list was suggesting *removals* from the existing Famous Portlanders list. Pjrich 01:33, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Clarification and further detail: it seems to involve the NLF, the Northwest Liberation Front, and seems to be organized by a guy calling himself Ronald James Scheller, which also seems to be the name of one of the principals in the NLF's history. The same guy seems to be posting on random forums online on a variety of inflammatory topics including legalizing marijuana, etc. As far as I can tell the point of his duplicate forum posts is to get the phrase "City of Bombs" in the google ranking. It smells like amateur cointelpro from here. Pjrich 01:41, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

• Tonya Harding - Yes, it's fashionable in Puddle Town to dislike her, but around here, when you mention Tonya, you think of Clackamas County. Sorry, even if you argue that Joe Clueless in New York thinks she lives in Portland, my response is that the same Joe Clueless probably thinks Oregon is a suburb of Los Angeles.
• Phil Knight - Nike is carefully situated outside of the city limits of Beaverton. I doubt that Knight even lives in Portland. Portland doesn't need to steal famous names from its suburbs. -Edit- Phil Knight lives in Sun River Oregon.
• Monica Lewinsky - Once upon a time she attended Lewis & Clark. Some days I'm not even sure L & C is inside of the Portland City limits; some days people at L & C don't care who she is, let alone know that she took classes there. And when the press looks for her, they pester folks down south in Los Angeles.

Sheesh, if we don't show a bit of restraint, who will be added to this list next? Garrison Keillor, who lost a manuscript at the train terminal here? L. Ron Hubbard, who was stationed here for several months in World War II? (Okay, he's a maybe.) George H. W. Bush, who was picketted every time he showed his face in Portland? Rudyard Kipling, who is rumored to have left the train during a stop in Portland to take a leak?

Yes, I'm probably ranting here, but is Portland so insecure about its self-worth that anyone tangentially connected with the city must needs be listed? -- llywrch 00:44, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Just noticing the irony between the list of suburbs and the satelite cities remark. This remark is also somewhat inappropriate for an encyclopedia. - Pingveno 04:06, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

A note about Phil Knight: Actually, he is from Portland, as far as I am aware. I know a man who grew up near him in Eastmoreland. I'll leave someone else to doublecheck and possibly re-add him to the list.

206.138.226.162 had added Oregon Graduate Institute of Science and Technology. I removed this because it's actually in Beaverton (maybe it should be on the Beaverton page). This comes out of an earlier case where llywrch had pointed out that Marylhurst University is actually not in Portland. To avoid this page becoming a laundry list of "nearby" things, the colleges list has been kept to those that are actually in Portland. --Nate Silva 03:16, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Not to be contentious, but OGI ha sbeen merged into the Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU), by acronym slight-of-hand, formerly the Oregon Health Sciences University. OHSU is based in Portland, so I don't know if that changes anyone's mind about anything. -- Gnetwerker

Spelling of TriMet/Tri-Met

I just noticed that Tri-met is spelled incorrectly. However, I'm not going to correct it because there is a link that might be destroyed if incorrectly edited. TriMet should be changed to Tri-met. Pingveno 05:28, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Both spellings are correct. http://www.tri-met.org and http://www.trimet.org TriMet is preferred. Mkmcconn 18:25, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Actually, it used to be Tri-Met (capital M); the dash was taken out in 2002 (and the logo redone) --67.160.146.193 20:04, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Shanghai Tunnels

Having just been on an extremely informative and interesting tour of the Shanghai Tunnels (more formally known as the Portland Underground), I think it would be both appropriate and interesting to either include information on them in this article, or even start a new article and link it in. What would people prefer? Tim 15:35, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)

I think you should start a new article and link it...sounds interesting. Cacophony 21:44, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)

I agree! Start a new article with your knowledge and link it. Mitchowen 11:42, Nov 7, 2004 {GMT -6}

For the record, I would like to say that I believe most of the stories about the Shanghai tunnels are complete fiction. If you're going to write an article, make sure you get plenty of good sources. --Sean Kelly 03:27, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I started a stub on the shanghai tunnels. Hopefully, someone around here who knows more than I do will expand on it. Maybe add this on the tourist attractions list? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ccj (talk • contribs) 14:27, March 26, 2005

A few pointers:

1. Please sign your comments. It's easy to do by adding ~~~~ at the end of what you write. If you don't have an account, please create one: it only takes a few minutes, & will benefit one & all if you do so.
2. I'm unaware that these tunnels are shown to tourists on a regular basis, in the manner Underground Seattle is shown to tourists. I've heard rumors, & announcements of tours, but I've also heard stories from local newspaper writers that these tunnels have all been filled in or sealed off long ago, or due to liability problems are not shown to the general public. (And I say this as someone who would eagerly like to view them.)
3. I seem to remember that a number of these tunnels were originally created not with the intent of trafficking in human merchandise, but to facilitate moving goods from ships to stores in the downtown area; their usefulness for secreting hapless men onto ships for money was merely a bonus. Calling them "shanghai tunnels" would thus be a misnomer.

And a last comment. As one of the few native Portlanders who can document having ancestors residing in this city back to 1870, and who had a relative who was shanghaied (namely my maternal grandfather, which is why I felt compelled to begin that article), while finding it ironic that he was shanghaied outside of Portland -- namely Port Angeles, Washington, I think that we can find a better phrase with which to label a number of half-remembered, hard-to-find passageways under downtown Portland shanghai tunnels. -- llywrch 02:11, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It actually looks like an interesting find, I wouldn't mind checking out myself. See these links: Oregon.com - Experience Oregon, NYTimes article, Portland Underground Tours ... looks to be the legit company operating the tours, their phone is referenced in the two links above. Aaronmz 02:38, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

Sorry about not signing my name. As for the tunnels, I've always heard them called the shanghai tunnels. That's what people call them. Of course they weren't made for that purpose, but that's what they're remembered for. And yes, they still exist, and you can tour them, as noted above. Ccj 05:57, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The last paragraph in the history section is false and is a form of commercial advertising. "Like other west coast ports, Portland was home to frequent acts of shanghaiing. Tunnels under city blocks stretching for blocks from the Willamette River, although built for legitimate business reasons, became known as shanghai tunnels because of their purported use in such kidnappings. Portland was unique because trap doors (known as "deadfalls") were used to drop the unsuspecting victims into the tunnels where they were held in cells until the ship was ready to set sail. From 1850 to 1941, Portland was known as the "Unheavenly City" due to this shocking practice. A variety of tours of these tunnels are now given." Portland was not a city know for shanghaiing for the simple reason of geography, if you shanghai someone you still need to go down the Columbia and out to sea before you could let the shanghaied person out to work on the deck. Cities on the cost, like Astoria, were where shanghaiing happened. In addition there is no evidence of any tunnel complex under Portland, as Portland is next to two major rives (also no physical evidence of the tunnels exist today). In addition the theory of trap doors ("deadfalls") is illogical, why would you have a potential sailor fall about 10 feet down, he would get hurt. In addition the tunnels and trap doors are a waste of time and money, it is just easer to get a man drunk and then carry him to a cart and drive the cart down to the dock. In addition there is only one person who gives "tours" in Portland and this reference is advertising for him. As such I am deleting this information from this entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.237.166.109 (talk • contribs) 14:30, March 2, 2006

I think you are probably right, but someone might come along and roll back your delete because you didn't explain it at all (or say "see talk page") in your Edit summary. So it looks like simple blanking. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:37, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Also, if you could find a reliable source that disputes the shanghaiing stories, that would be helpful. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:38, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Forgot to put that in there. I can't remember any paper sources right off the top of my head and if you try to search online all you will get is web pages related to the commercial tours of the "underground"

But you can contact Richard Engeman the Public Historian at the Oregon Historical Society (503-306-5247, richarde@ohs.org) some time last year he did a lecture on this topic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.237.166.109 (talk • contribs) 15:19, March 2, 2006

Please do find some sources. I know that rather extensive and very old tunnels do exist beneath Old Town in Portland, and these tunnels do emerge near the waterfront, and tours are regularly given of them. Stories about the Shanghai Tunnels are profuse around Portland. Now, I'm willing to entertain the notion that these tunnels were built for some other purpose, and that all the stories about Shanghai-ing are just a (very) well-established urban legend. However, I think that you need to show some evidence for this. In an hour of Googling for "Shanghai Tunnels" along with words like "hoax" and "myth" and "fabrication", I found scores of independant sources attesting to the purported reality of the Shanghai tunnels stories (although some of the stories were obviously just prime urban-legend stuff), and not a single source contradicting this. Therefore, I'm reverting the paragraph, until some evidence to the contrary can be provided. I encourage you to follow up on this, however. If the Shanghai Tunnels are indeed an urban legend, then this would merit not a deletion, but an entire explaination of its own, as it is such a significant piece of Portland lore. Skybum 08:11, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

The book Wildmen, Wobblies and Whistle Punks by Stewart Holbrook, an old-time Portland journalist, talks about shanghaiing and Portland as a shanghaiing town. I've read it. You can also check out the wiki entry on shanghaiing, which reiterates the same information. The only untrue part that I see in the mention of the tunnels is that "a variety of tours are now given": to the best of my knowledge, only one person gives tours of the tunnels (though he might give a "variety" of them). Katsam 01:05, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Removed paragraph on Vera Katz

An anonymous user removed the following paragraph:

In 2003, Vera Katz, mayor since 1992, announced that she would not seek a fourth term. In the May 18, 2004 primary election, none of the 10 candidates running received a majority of votes, so the two with the most votes -- former police chief Tom Potter and City Commissioner Jim Francesconi -- faced each other in the November general election with Potter defeating Francesconi by a wide margin.

It was later added back in. I personally agree that it should be removed. The election is over, and this article doesn't need to be bogged down with the results of past elections. --Sean Kelly 03:31, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Removed paragraph on PBR

I took out the following paragraph because it sounded like two babbling drunk people. Seriously people, this is an encyclopedia.

However, strange as it may sound, per capita, Portland also sells the most Pabst Blue Ribbon, not consider the highest quality by many beer drinkers. This seems to be an apparent backlash to the microbrew revolution. Though it could be that "PBR" is a "not bad" tasteing macro beer that is cheep. - Sean Kelly 12:47, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Good call. --Nate Silva 17:26, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Asa Amos Lawrence Lovejoy

Someone changed founder Lovejoy's first name from Asa to Amos. Google reports both Amos and Asa, and there are a couple of references to "Asa Amos Lawrence Lovejoy", which might have been his full name. But based on two URLs: [1] [2], Asa seems preferable. 66.167.139.8 11:43, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Page getting big

Does it seem to anyone else that this monolithic page about Portland is getting a little too big? I would like to see more sections be broken out into separate pages. Comments? --Rootbeer 18:46, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This is what happens when things that are properly done by an individual are instead done by committee. Even the Declaration of Independence was left largely to one person to write, I think. There is waaaayyyy too much nitpicking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.225.84.214 (talk • contribs)

The "nitpicking" is part of the process of improvement. If you are not satisfied with it, then don't work on it. This is the place to discuss the Portland, Oregon page. If you would like to discuss the process that Wikipedia uses, then I suggest you take that converstaion elsewhere. Cacophony 18:20, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

No mention of the Benson Bubblers!

there is currently no mention of the benson bubblers, but these are a very distinct part of portland, so would someone add them? i would do it myself, but im not sure where in the article to put, and i need to go to bed. -- ericl234 ^talk 08:52, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

Where are you from? In Portland, we call them water fountains or drinking fountains, not bubblers. The first time I (a PDX native) heard the term bubbler was when I was 18 and a high school friend of mine, from Boston, told me about the differences between his English and ours. While I agree that the Benson fountains need to be added, let's call them by the correct term, please. Squidley 06:56, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

They are indeed water fountains, nicknamed "Benson Bubblers", named after Simon Benson, who commissioned the fountain's design. Check out this article. Jacob 07:09, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I've always called them Benson Bubblers and I've lived in Portland my whole life. The Portland Water Bureau calls them Benson Bubblers, too. I'll add a section on them, by the way. StradivariusTV 17:39, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

They are definitely Benson Bubblers. Maybe you should research what you're talking about before you get an attitude about it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.59.77.56 (talk • contribs) 21:24, July 7, 2005

On the website for Portland City Hallthey refer to them as "bubblers." Also this article definetly needs to be spliced into separate articles: "Culture of Portland", "History of Portland," etc.--Offkilter 23:07, 26 July 2005 (UTC)'

As has always been explained to me, both "Benson Bubbler" and "Benson Fountain" are appropriate depending on the time of year. Bubblers are on 24/7 and shoot vertically. Drinking fountains are on-demand units that fire diagonally. In the winter, Benson Bubblers are all turned on. During the summer in recent years, they often turn all the bubblers off at all but the most popular bubbler locations and convert one of the bubblers in a cluster of four into a fountain for the water shortage season. Being a native of Portland, I recall being held up by one of my parents to drink from the bublers, but not knowing what a drinking fountain was and that drinking fountains work by fiddling with it until I was 5 on a trip to southern California. The Benson Bubbler is everywhere in city center and Elliot areas...--BalooUrsidae 08:29, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Quite a while ago I linked in Simon Benson under education. The article there descibes Benson Bubblers in some detail. The term bubbler was probably used becuase its an alliteration. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Strickjh (talk • contribs) 14:53, October 20, 2005

On the website for Portland City Hall they refer to them as "bubblers." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Offkilter (talk • contribs) 15:07, July 26, 2005

Wikipedia:Oregon Wikigroup Project marked inactive

The Wikipedia:Oregon Wikigroup Project has been marked inactive. If there's interest, please join and help it re-activate. 66.167.137.190 08:29, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

time to clean up

This article needs to be cleaned up. As mentioned above, some of this article needs to be splintered off (i.e. the 'quadrants'). The tourist attractions section and below also need to be re-worked. I am going to nominate this article for COTW to get some more help. If Seattle can be a featured article, so can this! There is good stuff here, we just need to clean it up and parse it into some separate articles. Jacob 04:55, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Oops, I was informed that this article couldn't be COTW because it's not a stub. Maybe peer review instead. Jacob 21:25, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Maybe a page like "Regions of Portland", which would include all of the information under Northeast, Southwest etc... but leave behind the general overview? I've seen a number of pages which will include a breif description (often almost recreating the intro paragraph of the destiniation page) underneath the title "See xyz for a full description..." I'd be willing to set that up if no-one objects, and it would cut down on the clutter. --Icelight 00:29, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

I think Tourist Attractions, Gardens, etc. should be split off into their own pages. That will make the main article a bit shorter and allow for better organization in the new articles. StradivariusTV 16:09, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I have to agree that this article badly needs some work. It reads as if everyone who has lived -- or heard of -- Portland has stuffed in their favorite trivia, without attention to how the larger article reads. -- llywrch 17:31, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

I also agree that the continuity could be improved. I am not really sure why the neighborhoods need racial classifiation. Where is the threshold at which point a neighborhood becomes "working class" or "ethnically diverse"? Cacophony 00:43, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

Ok, so I'm not from Portland, never been there either. But this article really doesn't tell me anything about the city, nor does it make me want to visit! It's quite very poorly organized, and doesn't seem to fit any other standard of any other articles on cities that I've seen so far. A couple of major things: first, the GEOGRAPHY section is very short, and then goes to THE CITY AND THE REGION, which really should be somewhat included in the geography section, but it's not. Seems to me like a lot of the information about the quadrants could be moved into sections on culture and economy. Which brings me to another point: where's the section on ECONOMY (or business)? Somebody looking for info on major companies in Portland isn't going to find it by looking at the contents.

Major sections on TRANSPORTATION, ARCHITECTURE, and PORTLAND IN POPULAR CULTURE, with no text and only links to other articles shouldn't be there. Should be listed under SEE ALSO. Though, there should be a main section called INFRASTRUCTURE, where you would find subsections on GOVERNMENT, SCHOOLS, TRANSPORTATION, and maybe UTILITIES.

A main section called BEER, while interesting, really isn't a main section heading. It should probably be under a main section called PEOPLE AND CULTURE, along with the section on PARKS, SPORTS, and even DEMOGRAPHICS.

Also, the EXTERNAL LINKS section is way too big! Keep it to a minimum, with generally links to the official sites, convention & visitors bureaus, chambers of commerces, and such. Personal websites and links to other businesses in Portland really shouldn't be there. If we were to link to all business in Portland, the page would be way to long. Wikipedia ain't no link farm.

Well, hope that helps. I don't mean to be too critical, but the page does need a major overhaul. Examples of good city pages include some featured articles, including your neighbors in Seattle, Washington, as well as Louisville, Kentucky. The pages for Chicago, Illinois and Washington, D.C. are also pretty well organized. Dr. Cash 01:02, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Washington Park

Hi- I was just looking through this page and noticed that the part on the "Zoo stop" could be a little more informative. I changed it a little bit to reflect that the actual name of the stop is "Washington Park" and also mentioned that it is home to the OREGON Zoo and HOYT Arboretum and also mentioned the International Rose Test Gardens and Japanese Garden as well. I also mentioned that it is the deepest subway stop in the world, which I think is worthy of mention. Still, I think the section could use a little work. I think Washington Park could even use its own page. I'm probably not the one to do it, though, since I don't really know all that much about it. -- Phil Bastian

I believe the Washington Park stop is actually only the the deepest in North America. I saw a documentary on cable which listed a train station under Moscow (St. Petersburg) as the deepest in the world. Quick google search reveals http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro, so I could be wrong, the issue shuold probably be researched and resolved there first. -- Glenn Peters

That is correct, Glen. It is the deepest in North America. It's 261 ft (79 m) below grade at its deepest point, but I don't have a source for that so don't quote me. The Metro in Pyongyang North Korea is deeper, with Puhung station claimed to be 100 m (328 feet) below street level. I believe that some stations of the Moscow Metro are slightly more than 100 m below the surface. --Nate Silva 7 July 2005 19:10 (UTC)