Talk:Dayville, Oregon

Oregon Mid‑importance

	Oregon portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oregon on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OregonWikipedia:WikiProject OregonTemplate:WikiProject OregonOregon articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
The current collaborations of the month are Women's History Month: Create or improve articles for women listed at Oregon Women of Achievement (modern) or Women of the West, Oregon chapter (historical).

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Level of detail

Thanks a lot for improving this article. I'd just like to point out that mentioning things like the fact that the town has a fire department, the park has picnic tables and the school has a gymnasium isn't really encyclopedic, and is probably orginal research. Forgive me if it isn't. But ideally everything in an article should be backed up with reliable sources and be the kind of thing one would normally find in an encyclopedia. I think it's fine to mention, for example, that a town consists of only a store and a cafe, to illustrate its smallness, but a detailed inventory of everything in a place isn't really necessary. It's better to include the things that make the place unique, like the thing about the cottonwoods. I tried to come up with a source but I couldn't find anything. Anyway, those are my suggestions. I'll add some history from the good book some time today. Katr67 01:04, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Katr67. You may be right about the level of detail not being encyclopedic. Let me stew about this for 24 hours or so, and I'll probably delete some of it. It's not original research, actually, though I spent a month in Dayville last year. The fire department and picnic table factoids come from the Chamber of Commerce site that I've cited, and the school details come from the school web site I've cited. Well, I slipped in the stores, post office, and gas station with no source, so those will have to go for sure. I'll delete them in a minute. I have a couple of nice Dayville photos that I'd like to add, but I have to upload and license them first. Finetooth 01:24, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Me again. It didn't take me 24 hours. Order is restored to the article, I think. The industry and school sentences don't quite fit into Geography in a logical way, but it's hard to know what to do with them. I, too, tried to find a source for the cottonwood claim and failed. I think the claim is doubtful. I'm guessing something still could be said about the town's history and perhaps the geology of the area. Finetooth 01:42, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Dayville, 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 22:32, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]