Talk:Portland Building

The Oregonian. Aboutmovies (talk) 09:07, 10 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Talk:Portland Building

Expansion source

The Oregonian. Aboutmovies (talk) 09:07, 10 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

http://wweek.com/html/25-what.html -Pete (talk) 16:19, 21 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Controversy

The building remains controversial among Portlanders

There is/was a bus operator who referred to a stop for it as "..., Portlandia, the great ugly building it sits on" --Jason McHuff (talk) 09:15, 23 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Only one name

I have removed from the article the claim that "Portland Municipal Services Building" is an alternate name for the building, as was already done earlier for "Portland Public Services Building" (also claimed to be an alternative name for the Portland Building), due to lack of evidence. The Emporis listing is the article's only reference for this claim, and I do not believe that one reference is sufficient on its own to support including this statement in the article. Personally, Wikipedia is the only place I've ever seen this claim, but if someone else has reliable sources to support it, then feel free to re-add the statement, with citations. SJ Morg (talk) 10:34, 7 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

i should think that the emporis reference is more reliable than one editor that doesn't concur. either way, there are google references found under the other name, and that is sufficient for a mention in the article, even if it's just for a cross-reference. --emerson7 02:42, 8 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

Sources

Goldberger's remark WAS negative

"Not all commentary has been negative." begins the 4th paragraph under "Reception." But that quote by Goldberger is definitely negative. He said that our building's look drove other American architects back to classic architecture. So if you ever rewrite this section... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.164.179.189 (talk) 19:57, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.