Talk:Bangor, Maine

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bangor, Maine article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Maine Mid‑importance

	Maine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Maine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Maine 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.MaineWikipedia:WikiProject MaineTemplate:WikiProject MaineMaine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

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

Naming Bangor

Even as an 8-year-old kid who loved Bangor (I was born and grew up there) I could never believe that ridiculous story about the guy whistling some hymn while he's in a office dedicated to naming the settlement. The bureaucrat says: "What's that?" "Bangor." "Oh, okay. See ya later." So the first guy then walks off without bothering to tell the official what the name is supposed to be? Or wondering why the guy doesn't ask him what it's supposed to called?

Total bullshit. Let's ask Stephen King -- he's another writer: does this sound plausible enough to put into any of his stories? Hayford Peirce 30 June 2005 04:30 (UTC)

I've lived all my life in Bangor, and I agree with you--but the article does note the story as being "apocryphal," which means "probably not true." Here's my theory: I actually heard the settlers wanted the town to be called Sunbury, so I think when the minister went to Boston, he merely chose Bangor as the name instead, in honor of his favorite hymn... and then made up some silly story to cover his, ahem, "mistake." And since we'll never know the answer to this, asking Stephen King merely because he's a writer isn't going to answer it for us. Indy 23:26, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was being, shall we say, sardonic about asking Stephen King.... Hayford Peirce 19:09, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. My apologies. Hard to tell when someone's being sardonic when reading instead of hearing. Indy 00:28, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Having been born in Belfast, and having lived in Bangor, Northern Ireland for many years, I counted the number of towns in North America with these names. This was a few years ago now, but I seem to remember there having been something like 13 towns in the USA called Bangor, and about 6 towns called Belfast. With the large number of Scots-Irish and Irish-Americans in the USA, would it be surprising if this town wasn't named after the town of Bangor located in Northern Ireland? The only tune I can think of that mentions Bangor refers to the town in Wales. Either way, perhaps one of these towns deserves mention in the article. --Mal 15:15, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm from Brittany, there's also a town called Bangor, the etymology is Celtic. Ban means superior, suprem and Gor group, so superior group. In the case of Bangor in Brittany, it's connected to a monastery, a group of superior persons, more elevated spiritually or in education... Also, it is known for a fact that Britons came from Wales to Brittany's Bangor. In Wales, there are too places called Bangor, one Bangor on Dee was a big monastic place, in the county of Flint. The other's an episcopal center by the sea, in Caernarvon county. The Bangor in Ireland had up to 4,000 monks.
PetiteSalade (too lazy to sign in sorry) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.142.229 (talk) 05:05, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is Wiki accurate? Newsgroup discussion.

As I write this (April 3, 2006 8:55pm) I am in a lively discussion with a Bangor, Maine resident and writer of the official Bangor website who takes issue with the accuracy of Wikipedia in general and the Bangor, Maine and Bangor Area Transit articles in particular. He is definitely anti-wiki. I as a avid reader and contributor is of course pro Wiki. Read and decide for yourself.

Sorry for the "longnormous" link, but I don't know how to shorten it. The discussion was in the alt.tv.lost newsgroup and the relevant points begins with Hunter, which is me lamenting about an error I made in regards to when the new Ben Franklin $100 dollar bills debuted. It begins with reply no. 7 in the google group alt.tv.lost and I say:

"Sigh. Never mind. I finally did what I should had done in the first place and looked it up. The large portrait Ben Franklin $100 bill was introduced in 1996. Oh well. Note to self: ALWAS consult Wikipedia before posting"

Then the ant-Wiki guy, Ryan Robbins jumps in.

Enjoy. I hope I acquitted myself and wiki well. The discussion is still going on as I write this

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.tv.lost/browse_frm/thread/8cf90c00dc54519d/564ff59b9cff9c7f?lnk=st&q=buffhunter%40my-deja.com&rnum=2&hl=en#564ff59b9cff9c7f

.Hunter2005 00:54, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just read all of that. Hilarious!! I know of this guy, as I am from Bangor, and frankly his childish arguments are embarrassing. He does seem to be nothing more than anti-Wiki--probably watched too many Siegenthaler media interviews. Anyway, the whole point behind Wikipedia is that it's a self-correcting system; the various users work to constantly improve and correct. That's why there are external links all over the place--to support what's there. The BIG QUESTION, of course, is why this guy didn't merely correct the inaccuracies. Apparently he more enjoys crapping on Wikipedia and those who support it, and whining about inaccuracies. I'm sure, as others like him do, he'd argue that he doesn't want any part of such a bad thing... but taking part and correcting errors makes it a better thing, so that's a circular argument. I just realized I'm rambling, so I'll shut up now. Indy 00:28, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, you make some good points, which ought to be brought up from time to time when the frustration level of dealing with idiots all the time becomes too much. A lot of these people end up being identified as trolls, but sometimes it takes a lot of time and wasted effort, as the worse the troll, the most intelligent he/she is in dragging people into their trollish nonsense.... Hayford Peirce 03:10, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I knowk Ryan Robbins's website is not the official Bangor website (unless he himself has given it the "official" designation. His website has some good information, but not all of it is up to date or 100% accurate. He also does not cite any sources of information in his Bangor In Focus articles, so it is difficult to take him seriously. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.222.206.50 (talk) 15:32, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Objections to the photographs used in the entry.

I think the historical pictures used in the entry aren't the best choice for representing modern day Bangor. I think we should use modern pictures in the majority of the entry, and save the historical pictures for the "history" part of the entry, or for the bangor historical society. What follows are are my reasons why each picture should be changed, along with a suggestion of what should replace it.

"Central Park circa 1910" What is pictured here is now a small set of parking spaces next to city hall. There is no park there to take a picture of anymore. Further more, that picture is in the "media" part of the entry. Would it not make more sense to have a picture of "WLBZ", or perhaps even the "Bangor Daily News" office buildings in that spot?
"Old Post Office circa 1910" This building doesn't exist anymore either, and hasn't since 1911. Why on earth do we have this image representing the city when this building hasn't existed in the city for over 90 years? Why not instead have a picture of the current Downtown area? A picture such as the fountian in front of the wig and couriour.
"Pickering Square circa 1910" Anyone who may view this website, and see's this picture will be quite shocked by the modern version of Pickering Square. Picking square is now a parking garage, a bus station, and a local hang out for hoodlums. I feel a modern day picture of main street would fit better here.
"Post Office and Peirce Memorial circa 1945" I have no objection to this picture other than it is outdated. The building pictured is now City Hall and not the post office. I feel that A more modern picture of the Memorial with the Bangor Public Library behind it would be more suited to being the first picture in the "cultural" section of the entry.
"Chapin Park circa 1906 & Park Street circa 1910" these pictures while very nice have both been put in the "sports and recreation" section of the entry. Neither of these locations are good representations of the modern day "sports and recreation" that occurs in bangor. I feel some more modern pictures of the 13th street stadium, park, andwater park be more suited for this section.
"Penobscot County Courthouse in 1999, Hammond Street" This is a very nice picture. It's modern, it's clear, but why is it in the "Famous Bangorians" section of the website? Would it not make more sense to have a picture of Stephen King's house instead? Or perhaps maybe just a picture of the Hannibal Hamlin statue downtown?

Now don't get me wrong here i'm all for history and preserving it. But this is wiki, not the "Bangor Historical Society." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.52.28.34 (talk) 16:59, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Back on Wikipedia after a long break, and noticed that the picture I took of the Courthouse, which is mentioned above, was removed. How is this photo inappropriate for this article? Maybe its placement within the article was off, but it seems odd to remove it entirely. This is especially so as it is not a historical photo, but rather a non-copyrighted modern one, and there are several otjer photos of this ilk in the article. Maybe I'm just sensitive because I took it, but I'm curious for the rationale. Friejose 17:27, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bangor Salmon Pool

A long article in yesterday's New York Times about the salmon fishing in the Penobscot jogged my memory about the old-time Bangor salmon pool, which, as I recall, was just below the dam. Beginning in 1912, the first salmon caught every year went to the President in Washington. I'm too lazy to do it myself, but there's lotsa info available on the Net for someone to put in a (small) paragraph about this. Hayford Peirce 05:15, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tabitha King or Spruce-King?

As far as I've seen in other articles, Tabitha King's name has always been without Spruce. Why is it hyphenated here? Prometheus^-X303- 15:51, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Needs some updating

I noticed it has the Mayor's term ending in 2006. As it is now 2007 it would be good to get the new Mayor in there. I'd do it, but I don't live in Bangor anymore.

I also played with some pictures - I've done some photography work on Bangor and thought I'd add some of the nice shots I took here. I didn't want to totally grab all the photo spots, so I left several of them. Just thought it might dress up the article a bit! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GambitMG (talk • contribs) 23:38, 17 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

External Link

I'm thinking of deleting bangorme.com from the external link list. It seems to be just a news feed and lots of ads and doesn't seem to add much of value. Any objections? Webquest 04:03, 14 February 2007 (UTC) Deleted. Webquest 13:53, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sources? Accuracy? Paul Wall?

Paul Wall was born in Bangor? I have not been able to verify this; it seems that several sites list his origin as Houston, Texas. I have not found any mention of Bangor anywhere else. Does anyone have a source for this? Spacemanspif 05:37, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While I don't like to edit articles myself, there are three bridges that connect Bangor to Brewer, the Veterans Memorial Bridge which is I-395, the Joshua Chamberlain Bridge and Penobscot River Bridge (official name?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.105.249.86 (talk) 19:29, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sources / Accuracy (Never Heard of Paul Wall)

As to the official name of the third bridge: When I was a kid in Bangor (1941-1960), there were two bridges across the Penobscot. The one on the north was the railroad bridge. It still stands and still carries the railroad from Bangor to Ellsworth and beyond with a branch south to Bucksport. Immediately south of it was a highway bridge of similar steel girder truss construction, with a steel grate roadbed to allow snow to fall through. It carried US Rte 1A, and we always called it the Bangor-Brewer Bridge. The steel truss bridge was replaced with a realigned concrete bridge, I think in the 1990's. The Joshua Chamberlain Bridge was open for several years before I left -- I think it opened about 1956. 68.1.43.137 21:25, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Location of City Hall and Bangor Public Library (In the Culture section of the Bangor page)

Reading the Wiki Page on Bangor, ME, I noticed one phrase which seems to have two buildings confused. In the Culture heading, there is a reference to the Bangor Public Library, which has since become the City Hall. The article is correct that the Library is next to the Pierce Memorial. It is in fact the next building to your left (northwest) when facing the Pierce Memorial, and is still the Bangor Public Library. It has been much enlarged by additions added to the back of the building as I knew it in the 1960s. The next building to the right when facing the Pierce Memorial (southeast) was the US Post Office in the 1960s. My father worked there for many years. The Post Office has been moved to a site further north. The old Post Office at 73 Harlow St, SE of the Pierce Memorial, is the current city hall. City Hall moved there from the corner of Hammond and Columbia Streets. Bill Blinn 68.1.43.137 21:34, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's the Peirce Memorial. Trust me. Hayford Peirce (talk) 19:46, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Bunyan Statue

This statue is a Bangor icon. There needs to be a picture of it.--Dj245 (talk) 01:04, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, since it's an open project feel free to add one! Wikimedia Commons might be a place to start, otherwise you can upload licensed images yourself. Coldmachine^Talk 16:26, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is -- it's over on Paul Bunyan :-)--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 19:19, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proliferation of redlinks

Can we tone down the infodumps a bit? Not every person who lived in or passed through Bangor and can be found in a RS should be mentioned. Thanks.--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 20:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:It cover.jpg

The image Image:It cover.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --04:57, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation of Bangor

It would be useful if editors with local knowledge could add information regarding the correct pronunciation of the name "Bangor," possibly including an IPA transcription. Thanks, Baileypalblue (talk) 01:29, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't have IPA handy, but it's BANG-gore.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 06:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article incorrectly says locals pronounce it "bang-gore" while those from away pronounce it "banger". Correctly, it should read that locals pronounce it "banger" whilst the correct pronounciation is "bang-gore" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.179.72.19 (talk) 02:58, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bangor (pronounced /ˈbeɪŋˌɡɒr/ /bayng-gor/)

Correctly, it should read that locals pronounce it "banger" whilst the correct pronounciation is "bang-gore"

What's this? Some kind of joke?

62.68.98.138 (talk) 18:35, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a native, born and raised, I can assure you that we can identify non-natives that pronounce it "banger". A banger is a hammer. A banger is an English sausage. I am from "BANG-gore". Somebody with a thick Downeast accent might call it "Bang-guh". Having it in there as an alternate pronunciation is as misleading as having Orono, ME, pronounced "oh-ROH-no" (a popular out-of-state faux pas) instead of "OH-rah-no" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpetoh (talk • contribs) 00:15, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I second this. I've lived in Bangor for 10 years and work with many who were born and raised here. They all pronounce it BANG-gore. -Euicho- (talk) 13:51, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Editor from Portland. The vowels are FACE-vowel and NORTH-vowel. Bangor's accent is quite close to ours: FACE is lower than standard American, [ɛ͜ɪ] , and r in NORTH reduces to a vowel: [ɔ͜ɜ]. Many speakers distinguish NORTH and FORCE; the latter is [oɜ] (with hiatus). In this video, Steven pronounces it [ˈbɛ͜ɪŋgɔ͜ɜ] (typical of a native) [ˈbɛ͜ɪŋɜ] (imitating General American /ˈbe͜ɪŋɚ/) and [ˈbɛ͜ɪŋgoɜ] (hyper-corrected, similar to Gen. American /ˈbe͜ɪŋgoɹ/). If you don't make the NORTH-FORCE distinction (forth and fourth are homophones) listen close to the rhyming FORCE-vowels in "next door in the book store" [ˈnɛksdoɜ ɪ̃ðʌ̆ ˈbɤkʰstoɜ]. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wASA4JYuSkk?t=1m54s All this probably counts as original research, but I'm changing it anyway. 76.179.26.205 (talk) 18:41, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another good video here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_q9hAAIS-c 67.253.54.149 (talk) 17:38, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

+1. :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:25, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following video should answer this question once and for all: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_q9hAAIS-c — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5eNzzz (talk • contribs) 20:32, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly certain that Bangor got his name from the city in Wales, since the two cities have the same pronunciation. I'm not entirely positive, but it also would not be entirely surprising for a place in the United States to be named after someplace in the United Kingdom cuz a lot of places are in the United States at least especially in New England. Dakman111 (talk) 07:11, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article size: too long

At the time I write this, the Bangor, Maine article is 125 KB long. Wikipedia:Article size recommends that articles longer than 32 KB be divided up, and articles longer than 100 KB "Almost certainly should be divided". Per Wikipedia:Summary style, long article sections should be split into their own, independent articles and summarized in the parent article. Regular editors of the Bangor article are best equipped to decide how to deal with this situation, so I would ask them to take action. In particular, it looks like the History section is ready to be split off into its own article. Famous and notable Bangorians, Bangor in popular culture and Accidents and natural disasters are also very long; however, I'm not sure they are notable enough to stand alone as independent articles. It may be necessary to leave them in the main article, but delete most of their content; right now they stand as very long, hard-to-read chunks of information in list or list-like format. Baileypalblue (talk) 01:57, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I respect Bailypalblue's concerns, but don't think shortening this particular article should be a high priority. The Wikipedia:Article size page also advises, in the section "No Need for Haste", that "sometimes an article simply needs to be big to give the subject adequate coverage" and "certainly size is no reason to remove valid and useful information". Whereas many Wiki articles have reverted to nothing but lists, this one is still composed largely of prose, and of a generally high quality. Moreover, much of the information is not found elsewhere on the web, and must represent a large investment of time and research talent on the part of contributors. In the first half of 2008, this page was greatly expanded by the user "Skoopy", whom I suspect, by the quality of his/her prose, is a professional writer. This inspired myself and others to start adding to the scaffold that Skoopy created, and the article got more and more 'encyclopedic' (in a good sense). Whereas print encyclopedias are restricted in article size by paper and printing costs, the beauty of Wikipedia is that it has no such natural or economic limits. As Wikipedia:Article size puts it "readability is still the key concern" and Skoopy set a high standard which others have generally held to, even as the article has grown longer. And this is not to discount the contributions of even earlier contributors, such as Hayford Peirce, the science fiction writer, Sarak of Vulcan, JonHarder and many others. I like the way the page has grown, and have tried to 'tend the garden' lightly. I agree, however that it shouldn't grow much more, and have been careful about limiting the sizes of my own recent contributions. I suspect that its reached a natural limit - there must be few 'notable Bangorians' or references to Bangor in popular culture which haven't been fereted out at this stage. So I don't see it growing much more. But radically reducing it in size would be vandalism, and spinning sections off into their own pages would render many of them trivial ('Accidents and Natural Disasters' for example works well as an interesting way to finish the page, but wouldn't work as a stand-alone article). Anyway, for a small town which has spawned so many writers (including three of the most prolific in American fiction - Stephen King, Owen Davis, and Eugene T. Sawyer - see the 'writers' section) I can live with the Bangor article having a little more to say than those of similarly-sized places. Buskahegian (talk) 13:35, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was just looking through the article and noticed that, in my opinion, Famous and notable Bangorians is far too long, comprising by my estimate over one third of the entire article. I am impressed how it is well-written (not just a list), but find it goes on and on and on and on, etc, severely harming readability. Surely not every person discussed is notable to have mention here; I suggest creating a new page for Famous and notable Bangorians and here summarizing the most notable.

Additionally, I think that those listed under They married well are not notable and shouldn't be mentionned on Bangor's article (whether or not they should be in the proposed separate article is a different story). Also, I think the title "They married well" is pretty unencyclopedic, but I can't think of a replacement off the top of my head. -M.Nelson (talk) 03:01, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I've just noticed that there's been some conversation on this topic, so I thought I'd comment again. It is remarkable how this article has grown -- on January 1, 2008 it was under 20K long, which means it's expanded more than fivefold since then, most of that expansion coming in two sections -- History and Famous and notable Bangorians. That type of expansion tells me those sections may be ready to become their own articles. I appreciate Buskahegian's desire to save valuable content. What if we focus on splitting content out rather than deleting it? That way the content wouldn't be destroyed, it would be highlighted. As I've said, I think the history of Bangor is a notable encyclopedia topic, and looking again I agree with M.Nelson that Famous and notable Bangorians is also notable enough for a stand-alone article. Those two sections comprise 21K and 50K, respectively, so splitting them out would reduce the parent article size to a much more manageable 60K or so (taking into account the length added back for summaries of those two sections). Moreover, the article would be more readable with its sections in more even proportion. Comments? Baileypalblue (talk) 05:15, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there's no opposition.... I think that simply copy/pasting the sections to new articles could be done easily, but personally, not having much knowledge of Bangor, I wouldn't be able to write the summary sections for Bangor or the intro sections for the splitted articles. Baileypalblue, I don't know how knowledgeable you are on the subject, but you seem to be the only other person following this discussion. I posted a note at Wikiproject Maine asking if anyone there woudl help out, but that wikiproject looks a lil dead at the moment. If all else fails, we could just write half-decent intros and let the invisible hand of wikipedia sort it out. -M.Nelson (talk) 20:53, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just logged in again after having been away for quite awhile. Does readibility really have to do with length? It seems to me that readability depends on how inherently interesting something is, and the quality of the prose. Many Wiki articles which are much shorter are less readable than this one. I don't think its necessary, given the format of Wiki articles, and especially with all the hyperlinks, that they be edited for a reader to digest in one sitting. The trick is to make each section and sub-section interesting enough on its own so that a reader can enter anywhere, and click on the links that interest him or her, but want to come back for more. That's a different sort of readablity, and I think Buskahegian and others who've regularly edited this page (including myself some time ago) have tried to maintain it to a high standard of quality, and yes, readability. And the biography section is one of the most interesting, at least judging by the number of edits it attracts. Take it out, and I think the page looses much of its charisma. I suppose its attraction is in demonstrating that Bangor, despite being so remote from the rest of the US (even from Portland) has sent so many people out into the world and into the pathway of important trends and events. This has to be a revelation to those of us who grew up there, and who could only name a handful of other Bangorians, at best, who had made any sort of mark. In fact when I first came upon the page a couple years ago, the bio section had only Stephen King, Waldo Pierce, and a small number of athletes and show business people. The internet let myself and others find many more Bangorians of note (through obits and the like) with a few mouse clicks and - lo behold - there were over a hundred of us who did something noteworthy enough to deserve not only a link, but in many cases their own wiki pages. And this list includes (and should include) those few women who managed to marry European royalty, the Prime Minister of Australia, or into a famous Colorado brewing empire. Excavating all these biographies changes "the history of Bangor" as its been written and told for generations - generations who forgot, or just never knew about - all those who went away and did something noteworthy. And even though that very outmigration is as fundamental to the history and mythos of Maine as it is to Ireland. Now we know. Certainly you wouldn't do this for New York City or Chicago. But for Bangor, its a managable project, and I think a revelatory one. It can't grow much more - except to spawn new bio-pages from the red-links, which is productive to wikipedia - so I'd leave it alone. Skoopy (talk) 11:19, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have no fear, the guy who decided to clean up the 'Notable people' sections of all US cites is hear. Over the next few days I will make a 'List of notable people from Bangor, Maine' page and tackle porting the information over. I will also be turning it into a wiki standard list format. Any objections should be noted here. It would also be a good idea to give me a heads up about your objections at my talk page so I see the 'New Message' hint when I log in. Dkriegls (talk) 23:23, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kudos to the people who researched the copious information in this article; but almost seven years later it remains true that the article is too long, in particular Bangor in popular culture and Accidents and natural disasters. The history section provides little narrative, being mostly a chronological list of unrelated events e.g. The first lawsuit was brought in 1790, when Jacob Buswell sued David Wall for calling him "an old damned grey-headed bugar of Hell" and Rev. Seth Noble "a damned rascall". Interesting local color but adds nothing to one's understanding of the history of Bangor. The article was perhaps the inspiration for this XKCD cartoon]. I'm not saying the information should not be recorded somewhere in Wikipedia, but that it is difficult for the reader to find the key points that characterize the city among the large quantities of trivia. Other people have already discussed these same problems and have written up guidelines about WP:TRIVIA and WP:USCITIES --Cornellier (talk) 19:04, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have copyedited, restructured, and moved some information over articles about that topic, and have moved some information to talk:Bangor,_Maine/trivia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cornellier (talk • contribs) 04:28, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Revere

I have reservations about the place of Paul Revere in the account of early history. Please go to user talk: Dumarest for a discussion. --Dumarest (talk) 18:32, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Climate?

I came to this page looking for information on Bangor's climate but could not find any. I know other cities include climate information, could this be done for Bangor? Dgen (talk) 06:03, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lumber capital?

There are many reports that Berlin, New Hampshire was also head of the paper industry of the world. Should this article state that "Bangor was one of the lead paper makers of New England?" --Russianamerican1 (talk) 13:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Naming Bangor redux

Bangor is also the county seat of County Down, Northern Ireland, about 12 miles down Belfast Lough (loch in Scotland), from Belfast itself. I've often wondered if Bangor was settled by one or more people from northeast Ireland (as it was back then before the island was partitioned into Northern Ireland (the UK bit) and the Republic of Ireland (the part that people mean when they say 'Ireland'. I spent many happy hours there as a child and my most recent visit was in 2002.

Another source mentions a man called Ingram as an early settler and that's a typical Anglo-Irish name so . . .

There's also a Bangor, Wales and, as other editors note, Bangors elsewhere too.

Carledgar (talk) 21:53, 17 December 2014 (UTC)carledgar[reply]

Copied into chrono order. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:59, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

BDN COI Disclosure

I've added some links to archives at the Bangor Daily News for pre-existing claims that were uncited. I was a former employee of the Bangor Daily News from 2008-2010. I've tried to include some Press Herald resources as well, but the BDN archives are online, which makes it useful for this kind of thing. Just wanted to go transparent. Owlsmcgee (talk) 04:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

BANGOR AUDITORIUM

There's a picture of the "old" auditorium in the article. I no longer live in Bangor, Maine, but understand that the building pictured has been torn down. Even if that is not true, it has been replaced with the Cross Insurance Center: http://www.crossinsurancecenter.com/page/958/home

The former Cumberland County Civic Center in Portland, Maine, is now the Cross Insurance Arena: http://www.crossarenaportland.com/

In other words, Cross Insurance sponsors the CENTER in Bangor and the ARENA in Portland. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5eNzzz (talk • contribs) 20:39, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is correct that the V-shaped Bangor Auditorium no longer stands, and has been replaced by the Cross Insurance Center. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 03:04, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

removed it --Cornellier (talk) 04:03, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

origin of the name

[1] This is only an opinion written by a newspaper reader, who apparently doesn't have any credentials as an expert in a related field, so we cannot use this as a source, but it is clearly based on fairly detailed knowledge and could be used to contact the local library or other experts to get a reliable published source. --Espoo (talk) 12:10, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Bangor, Maine/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Needs more work especially in citing references. Re-assess when article has improved significantly. -- _Hdt83 ^Chat 06:42, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 06:42, 21 April 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 08:56, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Trains

I've heard there's some great fucking trains in Bangor. Is that notable? Are there actually model train conventions worth noting or is that fiction? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.133.12.250 (talk) 18:06, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Did Ricky from Trailer Park Boys write this? Jesus Murphey! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:6000:1517:82FE:0:4108:3E54:5E0A (talk) 04:24, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Bangor, Maine. 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) 05:41, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bangor, Maine. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.census.gov/geo/www/gazetteer/files/Gaz_places_national.txt
Added archive https://archive.is/20160602200744/http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2015/SUB-EST2015.html to http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2015/SUB-EST2015.html

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: 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) 21:08, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bangor, Maine. 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: 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) 14:48, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bangor, Maine. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140111084715/http://www.topmetroarea.com/ to http://www.topmetroarea.com/

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: 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) 09:35, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Assume good faith

CaradhrasAiguo's comment for this revision states that Cornellier is being "reverted" per WP:CIR. This is clearly not a "revert" in the usual sense in WP, where a recent change is backed out. I have not touched that part of Bangor, Maine in 4-5 years. Does this concern a very old edit, and if so, which one? Per WP:GOODFAITH what is the reason for tagging this as WP:CIR? --Cornellier (talk) 03:33, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation (Bangor, UK)

There should be disambiguation between this page and Bangor, Gwynedd, UK.

(Or perhaps the new format now hides the disambiguation.) 216.106.104.39 (talk) 22:51, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Real estate industry

Can we talk about how the real estate industry has appointed themselves as the gatekeepers of Bangor, doing everything they can to keep out people that are not in political alignment with Bangor’s conservative right wing agenda? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.68.66.100 (talk) 17:32, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]