Talk:Pine Valley, New Jersey

message: Just wanted to add some further info on the actual Teterboro population. The article I've included as a reference refers to a projected tripling of the population due to apartments that were in the planning stages at the time. These apartments have since been erected and the population has, at least, tripled. For some reason, the census neglected to include the new apartments and instead opted to only count the Huyler Street block of houses that they were already familiar with. Most of the citizens that lived on Huyler Street prior to the 2002 census, including the mayor and the entire town council, actually live in the new apartments and have not left the town. So while the article may only address the projected tripling of the population, it at least shows where things were headed in that area. It was accepted as a reference in the Teterboro article itself, when trying to prove this point. JohnBWatt (talk) 01:09, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, this source is from 1996, and therefore not considered up-to-date enough to justify your position.  When dealing with something so ever-changing as a census, you need something to prove that 2007 is different than the official number published by the US Census Bureau, be it a cite to town records or something.  We don't allow crystal balling on Wikipedia, and trying to extrapolate data from 1996 to be official 11 years later is, not only scientifically stupid, but something even the NYT wouldn't stand by today, given the data that is now available that says to the contrary.  Until you can provide something closer to 2008/9 about this to corroborate your claim, it cannot stay.  Besides, why is this such a hot-button issue?  I mean, I would be proud to be the smallest city in the state.  Just like the largest, no one cares about 2nd. EaglesFanInTampa 02:12, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Never treated this as a "hot-button issue." I just think it's stupid to give people totally inaccurate information despite what a flawed population study claims. While I'm very proud of being from Teterboro, it has NOTHING to do with the size or population of the borough. Even if being from the smallest city in the state, or in this case of this disagreement, the least populated, WERE something to be proud of, it's not the actual truth. I'm not looking for a fight to the end. I'm only providing information that I know to be accurate as opposed to information that anybody that drives through the town can see is wrong considering there's more than 18 occupied dwellings in the town. In my opinion, it's totally irresponsible to not, at least, mention that there's debate about the matter. JohnBWatt (talk) 05:36, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

text: Thanks Alansohn. I know we've discussed this over on the Teterboro discussion board. I appreciate you adding the info you did. I was actually just about to come back and point the same information out. I totally understand the citation issue but there really should be some kind of note that brings the population doubts up, until a clear source can be found. Otherwise, the article is just giving out bad information to people that may actually need it. JohnBWatt (talk) 06:05, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: And "SHELTER;At Three Times the Population, This Town Will Still Be Tiny" this article from The New York Times talks about the new housing, but dates back to 1996. This is one of those cases where you know something is true -- and JBW, I know you're absolutely certain -- but we can't find one reliable source to substantiate it. I know I've seen articles that talk about Teterboro's population boom, but I can't find any right now. Alansohn (talk) 06:17, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Teterboro population