Talk:Seventh Mountain, Oregon

Oregon Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.
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

Community

Is this really an unincorporated community as well as a CDP? Valfontis (talk) 23:56, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Um, I don't know. Aren't all populated places unincorporated unless they are incorporated? Finetooth (talk) 05:29, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another puzzle. Why did the GNIS assign three sets of coordinates to this CDP? Is that normal? Finetooth (talk) 05:33, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO some CDPs aren't also unincorporated communities--or "towns" if you will. I make the distinction that if a place is just a conglomeration of houses without a history of being a community that it is not an unincorporated community. Yeah, it's in an unincorporated area, but CDP already covers that. Does that make sense? And no, three sets of coords isn't normal! (Sometimes there is one set for the community and one for the site of the post office, but usually they are the same. See Talk:Saint Louis, Oregon.) I don't know why they did that! I'll try to check into this later. Valfontis (talk) 15:39, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense. I removed the "unincorporated community" from this one. My impression (from personal research) is that the CDP is essentially the resort with a few other things (fox dens, beaver lodges, lava beds, trees, hiking trails) thrown in. The condos, if occupied full-time, would have enough people to make up the total population count for the CDP. I'm pretty sure, though, that many of the condos are vacation homes, not primary residences. Maybe the two extra sets of coordinates are for two non-affluent hermits who live in hollow logs along the river in opposite directions. Finetooth (talk) 17:49, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That one guy must be doing pretty well, he lives on the 7th fairway... Valfontis (talk) 18:16, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple coordinates are always listed on items which span several 7.5 minute series maps. That is why long or wide features may have many coordinates. See Columbia River for 130 examples. —EncMstr (talk) 19:27, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Makes perfect sense. I'm used to seeing streams and parks with more than one set of coordinates, but this might be the first CDP that I've encountered that is long enough to qualify. Finetooth (talk) 21:24, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]