Talk:Eugene, Oregon

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeEugene, Oregon was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 12, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed

Climate[edit]

Climate section cites an astoria weather station which isn't relevant. should use eugene mahlon field — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.11.35.102 (talk) 23:17, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@73.11.35.102 I've noticed that too. Astoria seems to be merely some kind of a regional HQ for NOAA; but the numbers definitely look like they are for Eugene. Astoria would be a lot wetter and more moderate in seasonal temperature variation, due to greater marine effects.2601:1C0:CC00:45D0:C920:DAFC:99D:238D (talk) 20:10, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The climate section was poorly edited and now the comparison to Portland makes no sense. The first sentence states the mean annual temperature of Eugene. But the second sentence appears to have had the first part cut off and we are left with a discussion of Portland's average July low with no info on Eugene. This then makes the rest of the section confusing. Actually, the premise of Eugene and Portland having nearly identical climates may not be fully true as it seems Portland gets more snow than Eugene in the winter. I don't have any of these facts on hand so I didn't want to edit the article at this point. But if someone has the necessary data on Eugene and could straighten up this section it would help a lot. Mantisia 04:53, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Climate Template Also, please consider using the Template:Climate chart below, instead of the current markup (which is more difficult to maintain).

Climate[edit]

Eugene
Climate chart (explanation)
J
F
M
A
M
J
J
A
S
O
N
D
 
 
7.7
 
 
47
33
 
 
6.4
 
 
51
35
 
 
5.8
 
 
56
37
 
 
3.7
 
 
61
39
 
 
2.7
 
 
67
43
 
 
1.5
 
 
73
47
 
 
0.6
 
 
82
51
 
 
0
 
 
82
51
 
 
1.5
 
 
77
47
 
 
3.4
 
 
65
41
 
 
8.4
 
 
52
37
 
 
8.3
 
 
46
33
█ Average max. and min. temperatures in °F
█ Precipitation totals in inches
Source: Weather.com / NWS
Metric conversion
J
F
M
A
M
J
J
A
S
O
N
D
 
 
194
 
 
8
1
 
 
161
 
 
11
2
 
 
147
 
 
13
3
 
 
93
 
 
16
4
 
 
68
 
 
19
6
 
 
39
 
 
23
8
 
 
16
 
 
28
11
 
 
0
 
 
28
11
 
 
39
 
 
25
8
 
 
85
 
 
18
5
 
 
214
 
 
11
3
 
 
211
 
 
8
1
█ Average max. and min. temperatures in °C
█ Precipitation totals in mm

stuttermonkey (talk) 02:43, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Done for a while now. --Tesscass (talk) 00:17, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The date cited for the record temp of 110 degrees is June 28th, 2021 - which hasn't happened yet. How did this get in here? Is it automated? This made Wikipedia totally unreliable for info about the past with regards to climate.

I fixed the issue. Best, Tyrone Madera (talk) 16:30, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Issue with External Links[edit]

There's an external link to a site that claims to be "the" community wiki for Eugene. However, that claim is also made by another site. How should we respond to that situation? Greenineugene (talk) 01:27, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think since there are "competing" wikis, neither one should be there, so I took it out. Katr67 (talk) 22:00, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Include something about Madison Meadow?[edit]

The story of Madison Meadow would seem to warrant inclusion here, perhaps under Parks and recreation. I started to write this up here, but would prefer to see someone closer to this area and this article tidy up what I've started and decide where/how to insert it. I've included the references I found as of December 2008, with one update today (but there may be some more public coverage now that the project has been completed). Please feel free to just take my copy and use it! or contact me if you would like — I could help some, but don't have the time to devote to "doing it right" at the moment. Thanks! —Martha (talk) 02:22, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Economy[edit]

Molecular Probes is another company that is important in the diversity of the local economy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.160.190.11 (talk) 22:35, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anarchism[edit]

Is this section still relevant? Most of the anarchist activity was just high school kids acting out and it didn't really last that long. I wonder if it's still notable. Opinions? 198.6.46.11 (talk) 18:24, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No there is still such activity there, at least on an intellectual level. Sometimes with really good insights. I never agreed with political anarchism that used arson and other violent techniques to trigger change. I thought that was extremely stupid and dangerously childish. I am also asking myself, how attractive such anarchy outposts are with regard to economic development. It certainly does not help to attract new companies to the region. I love Eugene, but it seemed after the death of Ken Kesey, things changed for the worse, at least in my subjective perceptions. Downtown Eugene has never really recovered from the days of total closure to cars, and besides the Saturday market, it feels weird down there, particularly in the evenings. Also, a number of companies have left Eugene in the last years. Work opportunities and also just happening places are few. The outdoors are attractive and hardly anybody would want to live in Eugene because of its night life or restaurants etc. Still though, the U of O has a wonderful campus, but it seems like an ivory tower. Another very good place to go include the Mount Pisgah arboretum; the staff there is wonderful and so involved with education for kids and everybody interested in native ecology.
Now, with the massive investments in sports facilities at the U of O, Eugene has moved to the forefront of sports. I believe, sports are a driving force in that area. Of course, as an European, I so much missed the charm of old world buildings and the feeling to be in a real city. All in all though, Eugene is an excellent place to find a house to live in, also for gardening, exploring nature etc. There are also countless private clubs, (such as Audubon and garden club) which organize meeting and outings for those interested in nature. Another plus in Eugene, is Hendricks park, probably one of the most beautiful, public park, I have seen anywhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.78.144.210 (talk) 13:27, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
But essentially, it is the most provincial nest I have ever seen in my whole life. The anarchism there is more akin to political agitation of the far right. So, if one wants to see only one type of America, and one longs for being away from the world, then Eugene, Oregon, is the perfect place.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.1.72.125 (talk • contribs) 13:20, February 17, 2011
I am very undelighted about the fact, that "anarchism" has a special entry for Eugene Oregon. We have not seen anything decent coming from that black book. In essence, anarchism refers to vandalism and destruction. To call for the elimination of the State or any government structure is foolish to the highest degree. Whoever is prone to such subhuman instincts is no longer a humanist, and should not have a special category. Even "primitivism" is at most a romantic preoccupation with native people. But native peoples themselves would never associate with anarchism. I therefore will delete the anarchy section from Eugene, Oregon because it serves no purpose. I have read with delight texts by Claude Levi-Strauss but have not even seen him mentioned in anarchy circles. Why the University of Oregon would continue to support such movements is puzzling to me, especially because of the poor content of anarchist thought.85.1.72.125 (talk) 13:54, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear anon, most of your discussion above seems to be a general opinion about Eugene, and not about improving the Wikipedia article about Eugene. Please use article talk pages only to discuss the article. Also you should not remove cited sections of articles without discussion simply because you don't like them. And as an aside to the anon from 2009, many of the anarchists I know were well beyond high school age, which frankly, has no bearing on whether the movement was a notable part of Eugene history. Back to the article, it is possible that anarchism is being given undue weight but we should discuss that before removing the section. Wikipedia is not here to present a pretty, cleaned up, tourist guide version of the history of any one place. Valfontis (talk) 20:53, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, the Bob Welch column of April 19 2011 mentioned above ("Wikipedia for Eugene in question". The Register-Guard) comments on the article's coverage of this topic, though not specifically with regards to this discussion. 67.101.6.245 (talk) 18:39, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reboot (of 5-year-old discussion!)[edit]

Relevant, maybe. Undue weight, for certain. The Anarchy movement covered in this section, while interesting in some respects, did not play a significant or lasting role in Eugene's story. Kesey and the hippie influx of the 70s made a much more important contribution to the Eugene of today, and rate barely a half-paragraph under Arts and Culture. Even the bicycle movement is of greater influence than the five or so years that the anarchists were prominent. The anarchy section is clearly misplaced as well. Anarchy in Eugene is not a demographic categorization; it is a philosophy, a political affiliation, a cultural phenomenon, perhaps an historical oddity--and/or possibly comic relief--but definitely not a topic of demography. A more interesting (and more relevant) story would be downtown Eugene's recent transformation into a vibrant urban district, filled with new businesses, new residents, and unique culture. Someone should write that. Pontoof (talk) 05:26, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just found this discussion and have some thoughts to add. First, I totally agree that this piece is misplaced. It fits better in Cultural or History. As far as weight goes, I have to think that the anarchists have been a feature of the environment around here for a while, so maybe they shuold get SOME weight, but I think this section is pretty clearly self-promotion. I'd cut it down to like half and move it to Culture if it was me. BusterYeats (talk 19:27, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I say take it out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.211.82.4 (talk) 19:04, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect. Re: the two above comments {{sofixit}}. Valfontis (talk) 23:23, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like this section is the source of some contention, so I just wanted to let everyone know that I made a few changes. I removed the information about the 2 activists (out of 11 co-conspiritors) that were mentioned and wikilinked for no apparent reason. I would have brought the question here first, but the material was inaccurate and improperly cited, so I just removed it. I actually took the time to find sources for both of those people, so if there's good reason to include them in an article about Eugene, it will be easy to put them back. [See refs for the first 2 sentences of the second paragraph.] My personal judgement is that they're not noteworthy enough, nor are they relevant enough, for inclusion.--TheCensorFencer (talk) 07:44, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I moved this subsection, along with the "community" subsection, to "Arts and culture."--TheCensorFencer (talk) 04:40, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above mentioned section (on Anarchists) is no longer in the "Arts and Culture" section. And while some of the 'involved community' things currently mentioned there seem interesting & inviting to me, I really would like to know more about that stupid anarchist cra..q, which could suggest to me that Eugene is a place to avoid. UnderEducatedGeezer (talk) 01:51, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Geography[edit]

The infobox says the city area is 40.6 sq mi (105.0 km²), land being 40.02 sq mi (104.9 km²) and water 0.04 sq mi (0.1 km²). First of all, 40.02 sq mi plus 0.04 sq mi does not equal 40.6 sq mi. Additionally, the Geography section states "the city has a total area of 40.6 square miles (105.0 km²).[9] 40.5 square miles (104.9 km²) of it is land and 0.1 km² (0.04 sq mi or 0.10%) of it is water." The area of water switches to listing km² first instead of sq mi, and the sum of the total area seems to be adding sq mi and km² to get 40.6 sq mi. It also lists land area as 40.5 sq mi, which contradicts the infobox value of 40.02 sq mi. I tried determining which values should be correct from the external source but was unable to find the cited values. -Bufori (talk) 23:10, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The information was added at the fourth revision of the article by automated means from U.S. Census data. Originally it was X km² (X mi²), but of course somebody fiddled with that later. The original is a total area of 105.0 km² (40.6 mi²). 104.9 km² (40.5 mi²) of it is land and 0.1 km² (0.0 mi²) of it is water. The total area is 0.10% water. In those days, editors didn't provide external links or much else in the way of citations for finding the information source. At least the original is self-consistent. —EncMstr (talk) 23:25, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I updated the geographical values based upon the original addition that you cited. Since kilometers are more precise, I had intended on leaving the square miles blank since the infobox could do the conversion automatically, but the result seemed somewhat misleading since 105 km² is 40.54 sq mi and would be rounded to 40.5 (not 40.6 as the original data stated). Then the total area and total land area would have been the same number, and the total area of water would have been rounded to 0. So I thought it more appropriate to round the values manually to the hundredth decimal place for clarity. Yes, the km² are already listed and could have been used to determine that the total area and total land area are not really the same, but this way is more evident. I'm not sure if there is a rule or standard to displaying such data only to the tenth decimal place though. -Bufori (talk) 08:31, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits[edit]

First, and foremost, we must use Wikipedia defined reliable sources. For the editor who wants to add gang info, please click on that link and read what that is. It is not the websites of these groups or one person's website hobby. We need books, magazines, newspaper articles, etc. that have some indicia of being recognized as reliable and having some sort of editorial oversight. One person's website likely lacks editorial oversight. Thing the R-G, The Oregonian, Eugene Weekly, KVAL, etc.

Secondly, this article is about Eugene. Springfield has its own article, so things about its library or police go there, not here. Obviously, some mention of the neighbor and co-habitator of the same metro area deserves some mention, but it is limited to items such as what was left: metro population, dividing line, shared transit, and the bit about the river. In time a Eugene-Springfield metro article should be created to better cover the shared topics, but until then Eugene stuff should go in this article and Springfield info in those articles. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:11, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fox Hollow Road[edit]

I'm a little concerned about the picture being used for that road. Can we remove it? First of all, it is needlessly doctored; the colors are way off. Secondly, the author of it said that he "guessed the coordinates", which indicates (to me) that it mayactually not be Fox Hollow Road, but an incorrect assumption that it's Fox Hollow Road.

It just seems like this picture, in its current form, is unencyclopedic at best, and incorrect at worst. YellowAries2010 (talk) 22:59, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Be bold! Please fix it. An explanatory edit summary to the effect should suffice. —EncMstr (talk) 23:16, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I almost did. But upon further examination of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fox_Hollow_Road,_Eugene.jpg , and the uploader's talk about "guessing coordinates", I think he referred to guessing the coordinates of the picture, not snapping a photo through guessed coordinates. Therefore, I'm going to let it go. Nothing seems wrong, now that I've investigated more. WP:BOLD is great, but edits fore their own sake aren't. Leads to trouble.
Thanks for the bit about edit summaries. I've neglected that aspect of wikiediting. YellowAries2010 (talk) 03:44, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, the picture is WAY off. I'm not even sure that that is Fox Hollow! I it is, it must be a photo from the 1900's, because i'v never driven down that road in my life! — Preceding unsigned comment added by JellyBellyFred (talk • contribs) 18:27, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have placed on wiki commons perhaps a better image for Bike and walking Trails in Eugene if someone wants to use it [[File:NorthBankTrails.jpg|NorthBankTrails]] The pic location is technically in Spfld (by about 300 feet) however Pre's Trail, the North Bank Path, and the Canoe Canal are all in Eugene. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grrarg (talk • contribs) 15:10, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chart and table for demographics[edit]

I just added this chart I made to the Demographics section. It displays exactly the same population data as in the table below it. Would it be appropriate to remove the table or should it stay? Jsayre64 (talk) 01:19, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nice chart, Jsayre. A few comments, as it seems to touch on a few issues.
  • I agree that it's not ideal to have both the chart and the table in the article.
  • Personally, I like your chart better. I think a visual representation serves the average reader the best, as it very quickly conveys a sense of the city's growth, regardless of how "numbers-oriented" the reader may be.
  • The table, however, offers a few advantages: (1) specific census numbers, (2) specific percentage changes, and (3) citations.
There are probably a few viable options. The solution I'd most favor would be to transfer the table to the image description page for the chart on Commons, and to copy the citations in it into the caption for your chart in the article. I think that would cover it nicely.
Finally, a couple small quibbles, for your consideration: (1) It's probably best not to include the title "Eugene Population" in the image itself, but to use the caption box for it. It's generally friendlier for reuse, whether that's fixing up this article to work well for a sight-impaired audience, or for inclusion on other language version of Wikipedia. (2) For smaller screens, including laptops, I think the present size of the graphic is a little large. It's a judgment call, though.
Thanks for asking -- again, I think it's a good improvement over the existing table, and hope you'll continue to make graphics like this! -Pete (talk) 02:53, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the feedback, Pete. So I'll see if I can remove the title to the chart, I'll reduce the pixel size a bit, I'll move the citations into the caption for the chart, and perhaps the percentage changes could be moved within the article's text? I'm also confused about how one would move the table to the chart's description page. Jsayre64 (talk) 03:25, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Good question, this stuff gets a little tricky on the technical end. Basically, you'd want to go to your chart's page by clicking on it; then, in the box that talks about Wikimedia Commons, click the link that says "its description page there." That will take you to the very similar-looking page on Commons. Now, edit that page; and just cut-and-paste in the wiki code for the table.
Doing it this way, again, makes the table viewable by people that find the image from somewhere besides Wikipedia. That's why I suggest doing it there, instead of on the Wikipedia page. Does that clarify what I said enough? Feel free to ask more questions =) -Pete (talk) 04:01, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I did that, but the template fails and shows up as a red link, most likely because that template does not exist on Commons. Jsayre64 (talk) 15:41, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, sorry -- I hadn't thought about the template issue. I'll think it over a bit and post back later. We'll sort it out! -Pete (talk) 22:21, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved
by Pete. Jsayre64 (talk) 03:15, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Healthcare section[edit]

Just a few points about the healthcare section. I apologize if this topic has been addressed before. The Eugene metro area actually has 3 hospitals serving them. Sacred Heart Medical Center-University District operates an ER, a medical unit, a behavioral health unit, an acute care for elders unit as well as several other services (http://www.peacehealth.org/sacred-heart-university-district/services/Pages/Default.aspx). Sacred Heart Medical Center-Riverbend Campus which is one of 3 level II trauma centers in Oregon and home to the Neurosciences Institute, the Oregon Heart and Vascular Institute, the Stroke Center, and a state of the art surgical service that includes robotic assisted surgeries as well as many other services (http://www.peacehealth.org/sacred-heart-riverbend/services/Pages/Default.aspx). McKenzie-Willamette Medical Center "is an acute-care, 114-bed hospital located in Springfield, Ore., serving the Lane County area. The hospital provides a broad range of services, including Intensive Care/Coronary Care, Pulmonary Medicine, Oncology, Da Vinci Technology Surgery, CT Scan, MRI, Maternity, Reproductive Services, Surgery, Diagnostic Imaging, Rehabilitation and a 24-Hour Emergency Department that is a designated Level III Trauma Center" (http://www.mckweb.com/Services/Pages/Services.aspx). I realize you may prefer Riverbend and MWH to be in the Springfield wiki. In my opinion this misrepresents the healthcare actually available to a city the size of Eugene, which would otherwise seem to be limited to behavioral health, elder care, urgent care clinics and doctor's offices. SHMC-Riverbend campus serves a majority of Eugene's citizens. It receives over double the ambulance traffic (both Eugene and Springfield EMS) as University District and all of the surgical, critically ill, pediatric, orthopedic, oncology, neurological and a majority of the medical patients who need care either start at Riverbend or are transferred there from the University campus. It is the largest medical center in the area as well as the only local trauma center, stroke center and neonatal intensive care unit available to the city of Eugene. Riverbend campus is the site of many research studies benefiting Eugene through the OHVI and the Neurosciences Insititute as well as research collaboration between local clinicians and professors at the UO and learning opportunities for 3rd and 4th year medical students through the Center for Medical Research and Education. MWH is a full service hospital offering Eugene citizens an alternative atmosphere for surgical and medical care including open heart surgery, cardiac catherization, a well designed and welcoming birthing center, and an intensive care unit. 76.105.132.45 (talk) 22:36, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Climate Photo[edit]

I noticed the photo for Eugene's climate is full of snow. I've lived hear for 12 years and the weather is rarely like that. Maybe a picture of rain instead? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.189.2.58 (talk) 22:40, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was just noticing that. The caption actually says it was taken after a rare snowfall, so maybe it could work with a few more photos of sun and rain for a sort of spectrum. I don't have time to track those down at the moment, but I plan to; unless someone voices objection, or fixes it first.--TheCensorFencer (talk) 17:38, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Need opinions on online media source in Media section[edit]

Aside from the edit warring and misplaced embedded external link, is this website a good addition to the media section? Valfontis (talk) 00:37, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Eugene Bombers[edit]

Apparently the city had a team in the Continental Football League back in the 1960s, the Eugene Bombers. Aboutmovies (talk) 18:23, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox photo[edit]

I restored the photo of the federal courthouse to the infobox because the skyline photo of downtown Eugene from Skinner Butte, recently added to the infobox, is a great photo, but it is just like the one at the bottom of the Neighborhoods section. I agree that a photo of the courthouse is not ideal, but it works better in this article than two photos of downtown Eugene as seen from Skinner Butte. Jsayre64 (talk) 01:48, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well...maybe the photo in the "neighborhoods" section should just be removed? It's not like it's a necessary photograph in that section. The federal courthouse isn't exactly beloved, and it's hardly an iconic image of Eugene (while downtown from Skinner Butte certainly is).Binkyping (talk) 01:04, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Media[edit]

Suggested corrections. The Daily Emerald is not an Independent student run newspaper, it is part of Viacom: http://www.quantcast.com/dailyemerald.com

Considering this is Wikipedia, online only media should be considered as a sub-category. Organizations like Eugene Daily News (http://eugenedailynews.com) should be considered a member of local media; 2 years old as of this date, online only and hyper-local (Lane County) but focused on Eugene.24.22.43.191 (talk) 05:46, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed 67.171.211.245 (talk) 16:48, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notable mentions in popular media[edit]

I was wondering if there should be a section about this. Three instance I am aware of are

Sublime's song April 29th, 1992 included Eugene as one of the city's with riots on the streets at 3:24 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsQJJfTX6dE)
Futurama's comparison to "Bum Base Alpha" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpjcY4vENCY)
And the Simpson's comment on the beauty of Eugene (http://www.thefreelibrary.com/IT%27S+NO+JOKE%3A+EUGENE+GETS+A+PLUG+ON+%27THE+SIMPSONS%27.-a0113206410) Season 15 episode 324 "Margical History Tour"

67.171.211.245 (talk) 16:48, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering why there is no mention of Emily and Theresa from Warpaint? They were there before, but have now been deleted. They are both from Eugene and their band has reached more people worldwide than the Daddies. Also missing is Dustin Lanker from the Daddies AND the Mad Caddies. Deleted. Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.5.87.192 (talk) 03:50, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Community[edit]

Why is Community listed under Demographics? T-man 2396 (talk) 20:21, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good question, T-man 2396. I think that it belongs in Arts and culture, or maybe Arts and culture belong in community. I'm going to do the former now.--TheCensorFencer (talk) 04:21, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I moved this subsection, along with the "anarchism" subsection, to "Arts and culture."--TheCensorFencer (talk) 04:42, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is "members of a Eugene-based cell" better than "members of a Eugene cell"?

-based is fashionable and overused but rarely necessary.

86.139.156.35 (talk) 14:59, 26 September 2016 (UTC)cacambo[reply]

Conger Street Clock Museum, RIP[edit]

The Conger Street Clock Museum is closed, as of September 2016. The owner, J.D. Olsen, has retired.

The associated business, "Creative Clock", is being continued by former employees, and is housed across the street from the original shop. But the museum, alas, is no more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.43.249 (talk) 22:25, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Eugene, 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 22:11, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed changes to Eugene, Oregon history[edit]

I've drafted a proposed change to the history section for Eugene, Oregon. You can find it at User:Silver Water/sandbox.

I've created new subsections (Indigenous Presence; Colonial Arrival and Impact) and re-wrriten the subsection on Eugene Skinner so that it flows better. I do not plan to change the paragraphs on Educational Institutions or Twentieth Century at this point, though I will remove one stray sentence that I have added to the Eugene Skinner subsection.

Please let me know what you think. If I don't hear anything, I'll make the changes in seven days.Silver Water (talk) 22:55, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Eugene, 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 13:45, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Eugene, 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 11:23, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Eugene's political background[edit]

Hey folks, just looking to run by some changes for the article. I've added some local history to the page, specifically societal change in the 1960s, the 1990s, and now. I feel like there was a distinct lack of political background on this page given that it is already very well done and complex in many areas, and for a large city such as Eugene. Generally, for cities like Eugene, actions taken by the community, especially those that shape the culture and remain relevant today, deserve coverage.

I am currently working on a thesis involving Eugene's turbulent political history and was honestly surprised to see virtually none of it represented here. Anyways, that's my piece for the day. Thanks in advance for any input you have and more aptly, well done on the page already. Cheers! MarkRosewater (talk) 22:07, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The new history of unrest section should be a subsection under History, not its own section. It may help to look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/Settlements: Article structure for guidance. Thanks for the additions, which I have not yet perused carefully. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:56, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I moved the new history additions under the History section-- it's a little bumpy because it falls below the "Twentieth century" heading, so that section may need better integration? — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 00:58, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That looks really nice. Thank you all for using my information! MarkRosewater (talk) 03:41, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

History of Unrest Excessive Detail[edit]

I disagree that the history of unrest section is excessively detailed. It seems to account for necessary parts of the city's history. Tyrone Madera (talk) 15:05, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Section on Homelessness?[edit]

There's no section on the homelessness situation of the city. If someone could help to add that, that would be great. Tyrone Madera (talk) 20:45, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Matt pearson[edit]

Gdtfyggh 2601:648:8200:59D:2C74:5C7:F10E:BE8F (talk) 00:41, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation?[edit]

The latest GFS run is showing a Major Hurricane (which would most likely be named Eugene) impacting coastal mexico (it’s beatriz but stronger). There may need to be a disambiguation, because that hurricane name is most likely going to be destructive enough to warrant a wiki page. 50.39.162.156 (talk) 15:51, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, because Eugene is already a disambiguation page. StAnselm (talk) 16:32, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It may become the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for Hurricane Eugene, of course. StAnselm (talk) 16:44, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Eugene,_Oregon&oldid=1212016009"