Talk:Three Rivers South, Oregon

message: Did a quick search on info for the community and found this http://www.usda.gov/oc/photo/02cs1604.htm. Further search on the Eyerly Fire might come up with something... Katr67 18:58, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eyerly Fire  

message: ===Three Rivers, Oregon===
Three Rivers is an interesting example of wikipedia's laws limitations.  The problem is, there is basically no published information on the subject, so almost anything added is going to be considered original and thus wrong.  In this way, we can't learn about Three Rivers simply because no one has published it.  
I've lived in Three Rivers and my information is verifiable -- but "verify" here would mean calling the people and asking them if what i write is accurate.
So what's the solution to this?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Rayjackson30 (talk • contribs) 11:33, May 11, 2007
:Thanks very much for bringing this up for discussion. First of all, please read about original research. Unfortunately, personal experience does not count as a reliable source on Wikipedia. If there isn't anything published about the situation in a secondary source, I'm afraid it will need to stay out of the article, because as you correctly guessed, calling up people to verify the info doesn't count. I do find the "lawlessness" situation interesting, and I didn't know that Three Rivers was a gated community. Can you at least find a reliable source for that information? I see your revisions have become increasingly less POV, so thanks for working on that. If you want to go ahead and add a few sentences on the legal status of the community that are NPOV, I would be OK with adding a  tag to that part and seeing if we can find more information. BTW, I believe "photographic evidence" doesn't work as a reliable source either. I'll take a closer look when I'm not supposed to be working. I hope that helps. Katr67 18:48, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, its clear that the above discussion was about the wrong place called Three Rivers. A particular gated community and the antics therein probably aren't notable, and shouldn't be added to this article in any case because it is in a different county. Case closed. Katr67 14:57, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The name of the gated community in Jefferson County is Three Rivers Recreation Area, which makes it sound like a state park, though it is privately owned. If it's notable enough to have an article, or at least to disambiguate from the Deschutes County place, that's what the article should be named. Here's an article about the place being off-grid: http://www.bendbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060904/NEWS0107/609040317&SearchID=73256523953017 Katr67 15:33, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I have no idea why it's not a CDP--did you read the Census-designated place article? Not everything is about size. If someone thinks it's notable (read the guidelines), write an article. Katr67 14:17, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion retrieved from Katr67's talk page 

message: Three Rivers is an interesting example of wikipedia's laws limitations.  The problem is, there is basically no published information on the subject, so almost anything added is going to be considered original and thus wrong.  In this way, we can't learn about Three Rivers simply because no one has published it.  
I've lived in Three Rivers and my information is verifiable -- but "verify" here would mean calling the people and asking them if what i write is accurate.
So what's the solution to this?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Rayjackson30 (talk • contribs) 11:33, May 11, 2007
:Thanks very much for bringing this up for discussion. First of all, please read about original research. Unfortunately, personal experience does not count as a reliable source on Wikipedia. If there isn't anything published about the situation in a secondary source, I'm afraid it will need to stay out of the article, because as you correctly guessed, calling up people to verify the info doesn't count. I do find the "lawlessness" situation interesting, and I didn't know that Three Rivers was a gated community. Can you at least find a reliable source for that information? I see your revisions have become increasingly less POV, so thanks for working on that. If you want to go ahead and add a few sentences on the legal status of the community that are NPOV, I would be OK with adding a  tag to that part and seeing if we can find more information. BTW, I believe "photographic evidence" doesn't work as a reliable source either. I'll take a closer look when I'm not supposed to be working. I hope that helps. Katr67 18:48, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, its clear that the above discussion was about the wrong place called Three Rivers. A particular gated community and the antics therein probably aren't notable, and shouldn't be added to this article in any case because it is in a different county. Case closed. Katr67 14:57, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The name of the gated community in Jefferson County is Three Rivers Recreation Area, which makes it sound like a state park, though it is privately owned. If it's notable enough to have an article, or at least to disambiguate from the Deschutes County place, that's what the article should be named. Here's an article about the place being off-grid: http://www.bendbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060904/NEWS0107/609040317&SearchID=73256523953017 Katr67 15:33, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I have no idea why it's not a CDP--did you read the Census-designated place article? Not everything is about size. If someone thinks it's notable (read the guidelines), write an article. Katr67 14:17, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Three Rivers, Oregon]]