Talk:The Villages, Florida

message: Please do not add in-text or external links to your personal web site, to sites designed to advertise your business, to sites with extensive advertisement, or to sites created "to help local businesses promote themselves to the audience most likely to use their services," etc., etc. Such links are considered spam as per Wikipedia policy "Links normally to be avoided" and considered impropriate as per Wikipedia content guidelines at WP:SPAM. (Please see the section "How not to be a spammer"). Links mainly intended to promote a website, links to sites that primarily exist to sell products or services, links to sites with objectionable amounts of advertising, links to social networking sites and discussion forums/groups, and links to sites that are only indirectly related to the article's subject will be removed. Afv2006 23:20, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The book mentioned above seems to be a promotion "to the audience most likely to use their services" so I would vote that it should not be an external link on this page.  If it is an independent media source about The Villages, the unsigned person could break the Media section into 2 sections, Promotional Media and Independent Media, and reference it there.  Just a thought.   Anne9853 (talk) 18:46, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article and external links clean-up 

message: The article included a statement that the population of the Villages was close to 60,000 (I just removed it). The population of Lady Lake in 2005 was 13,244, and a good part of that is not in the Villages, so we might say 7,000 in the part of the Villages in Lady Lake (and that side is largely built out now). The Villages CDP had a population of 8,333 in 2000. We have no idea how many have moved into that area since then (and the Census Bureau does not provide updated estimates for CDPs), and no idea how many now live in the Marion County portion of the Villages. So, unless someone can ome up with a reliable published source for a population figure, we should avoid speculating in the article. -- Donald Albury 03:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: An estimate of population is available at http://www.thevillagescommercialproperty.com/ which puts the number of residents at 68,000. I've been there, this seems reasonable. MatthewEHarbowy (talk) 12:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a promotional site for the developers, and does not strike me as a reliable source. I have been there as well, and it is big, but we require verifiability from reliable sources, and do not permit personal observations as sources, which would constitute original research. -- Donald Albury 14:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why the developer's numbers should be considered any less reliable than those of the census bureau. In fact, the developer would conceivably have at least two strong incentives to deliver the correct numbers: First, to avoid legal liability for fraud in the promotion of real estate sales (who wants a lawsuit from someone who expected 70,000 neighbors and ends up living in a deserted development?), and second, to target its products and services to the appropriate market (who wants a disgruntled buyer who expected a small town from the census numbers and got a massive development with 70,000 neighbors?). The census numbers are not as current as the developer's, and they are not subject to these reliability incentives. Also, note that MatthewEHarbowy's (talk) personal observation that the developer's numbers are reasonable is being used in support of the reliability of the developer as a source, and not as a source per se, and is thus not subject to Wikipedia's ban on original research. Wtroopwept (talk) 19:18, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I would include both because the CDP boundaries are not the same as the overll development boundaries. Say "the developer said A, the CDP had B people" WhisperToMe (talk) 10:56, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population 

message: My understanding is that The Villages (the census-designated place) is encompassed in more then one county in addition to Sumter, i.e. Lake County and parts of the outlining of Orange County can anyone confirm this and if so shouldn't it be included like it is with other CDP i.e. Poinciana which is located in both Osceola and Polk County. Simon Bar Sinister (talk) 03:42, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  County or Counties 

message: If someone wants to write this section, please DO NOT talk about zoned K-8 schools - that is not relevant as the community forbids children - High schools *could theoretically be relevant (if the community allows 20 year olds and they may not have completed high school yet - I need to check) - Community colleges are certainly relevant. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:52, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notes about Education Section 

message: Supposedly a gynecologist was quoted in the Orlando Sentinel as saying that the villages had the highest std rate in Florida back in 2006. I don't know if a more reliable ref can be found or even if it is true. But it's "all over the place" on the web in unreliable notes. So, at best, it needs to be refuted as an "urban myth" if false; or reported with a good cite, if true.
Discovered another ref that claimed that it was in the "New England Journal of Medicine!" I could not verify this either. Student7 (talk) 17:03, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, not the Sentinel or the NEJM, it was just WKMG-TV channel 6 news . Personally I'd want better sourcing than that before putting something like that in the article; it's basically one doctor who says she's treated more STDs cases there than in Miami. Not any kind of "official" statistics, just someone's anecdotal evidence from practicing medicine in two separate cities. 28bytes (talk) 17:24, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Some more info from Ocala's Star-Banner: . Basically, yeah, it is an urban legend picked up by a bunch of websites because of what one doctor said to channel 6. Putting something about it in the article would seem to go against WP:UNDUE, in my opinion. 28bytes (talk) 17:37, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Highest std rate?

message: Orange Blossom Hills was the name of a development off of 441 next to what is now The Villages that I believe is the same development referred to in the article as Orange Blossom Gardens. The lots were intended to be for mobile homes, but many residents bought multiple lots and built houses on them. I think it'd be useful to define these two names/entities in the article, as I've also seen Orange Blossom Hills referred to as the name of the property company that owned Orange Blossom Gardens, and the name of a present-day golf club/community. I'll do some more research on this, but perhaps someone else has some information on this as well? Rjhatl (talk) 21:11, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Orange Blossom Hills

message: From the USA Today:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/census/profile/FL
The 2010 population of The Villages CDP is 51,442, a 517.3% increase since the 2000 census. Still, it's less than the estimates, which:
1. May include areas outside the CDP boundaries;
2. Count part-time (seasonal) residents;
and
3. Falsely assume that past growth rates will continue at the same speed in the future.
This new information should shed some light on the The Villages...clearly, with more than 50,000 residents now, it's grown tremendously since the year 2000. At the same time, estimates that it will soon catch Gainesville or Clearwater seem to be overstated.Ryoung122 21:16, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Census 2010 Results

message: Extensive quotes are included in cites about the political leanings of residents. These are quickly outdated by the next political campaign and election, and seem overweighted for an article about a growing community. I would recommend that the quotes be dropped; the sources are cited.Parkwells (talk) 16:20, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Parkwells, who someone votes for president changes every ten years, but political leanings may take longer than that to change. WhisperToMe (talk) 11:09, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Dated quotes on politics

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on The Villages, Florida. 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/20130911234518/http://factfinder2.census.gov to http://factfinder2.census.gov
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:10, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Back in 2007 the Wikipedia article for "The Villages" was merged into "The Villages, Florida" and I'm proposing we make a page for each to avoid confusion. One page for the private company and one for the Census Designated Place (CDP). Thoughts? Whoisjohngalt (talk) 21:35, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Creating a separate page for The Villages (Company) - Holding Company of The Villages, Inc.  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on The Villages, Florida. 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://factfinder2.census.gov/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090227155138/http://lpgmapserver.com/School_Zone_Maps/High/Leesburg_High.pdf to http://lpgmapserver.com/School_Zone_Maps/High/Leesburg_High.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:09, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I've checked the article against B-Class status.
| b1 Referencing & citations = <yes>
| b2 Coverage & accuracy = <yes>
| b3 Structure = <yes>
| b4 Grammar & style = <yes>
| b5 Supporting materials = <yes> Whoisjohngalt (talk) 12:59, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing status to B 

message: Re: this edit
Hi! I would like an explanation of how this is original research. I don't see how citing a published source like this would be OR in any way as I would be merely repeating the conclusions of an academic journal author.
* {explanation or other readers) Wikipedia in Wikipedia:Original research states: "The phrase "original research" (OR) is used on Wikipedia to refer to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist.[a] This includes any analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to reach or imply a conclusion not stated by the sources."- This means citing someone else's research - meaning the two links I posted, is perfectly acceptable and in accordance with Wikipedia policies. OR in a Wikipedia environment means something a Wikipedian does himself/herself, not based on any sources/references.
Additionally I do not believe any serious challenges were made to the source's contention that the "histories" on various The Villages plaques are false. This isn't like the STD claim (note Wikipedia:RS (medicine) sourcing is stricter)
Thanks
WhisperToMe (talk) 10:28, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original research? 

message: Should the event described in this article from Time be documented here? Title: The 'America First' Revival Tour Throws a Trump Rally Without Trumphttps://time.com/6046996/america-first-tour-matt-gaetz-marjorie-taylor-greene-the-villaages  2603:6010:4E42:500:A0A4:6545:E82:4576 (talk) 01:23, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't really see what that has to do with The Villages, other than it happened to be where the rally was held. - Donald Albury 01:54, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

text: Article has interesting local color and is a reputable source.  Perhaps the first writer could use it as a reference within a section on demographics, especially given the amount of space given in the page to presidential visits?  Be bold.  Anne9853 (talk) 19:02, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversial article about an event at The Villages 

message: Following the precept Be bold, I moved part of the Entertainment section to Criticism.  It seems to me that a matter discussed as aesthetic or philosophical criticism (Faux history) should not be under Entertainment. Anne9853 (talk) 18:51, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticism of The Villages

message: I need a bit more specific clarification on what portions of the article would be considered "Advertising"? I would be more than happy to fix any issues, but to just tag the large article with no explanation of what is advertising is not helpful. The article has a total of 1,175 edits by 399 individual editors over 18 years. Just give me some guidance or I will remove the tag.Whoisjohngalt (talk) 22:21, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Advertisement tag

message: Will it be okay to add about the prevalence of STD's in The Villages, and the Loofah code? 70.104.196.98 (talk) 14:05, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: As for the alledged STD rate, see the "Highest std rate?" section above, where the topic was rejected long ago as an :urban legend. As for the "Loofah code", that looks like another urban legend, and you would need to find very good reliable sources to have any chance of getting away with adding that. Even if you can find quality reliable sources, you still need a consensus of interested editors that it belongs in the article. I, for one, would argue that inclusion of such an urban legend might run afoul of our policy at :Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. - Donald Albury 17:03, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The large amount of STD's and the Loofah code 

message: This section seems underdeveloped or unnecessary to me, and furthermore it's unclear what it means. I assume it means "notable residents," in which case it should be titled that. RookWeaver (talk) 04:06, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: In most cases, a "Notable people" section in an article about a place includes people who were born there, or lived there for a significant part of their younger life, even if they have not been resident there for a long time. Notable persons who were born in The Villages or lived there when young are obviously going to be rare. In this case, I don't see a problem with calling the section "Notable residents", but some editors may prefer consistently using "Notable people" for such sections across all articles. - Donald Albury 18:20, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: @Donald Albury Fair, and I can definitely see how either way might be appropriate. I personally believe that since the community by definition is almost entirely limited to residents who haven't lived there for their whole lives, the section title should reflect that. But I'll hold off on making a change because I understand the consistency argument. RookWeaver (talk) 05:23, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: That said, unless I'm mistaken it seems everyone in the current selection of "notable people" are living current residents, criteria which are significantly more selective than simply all notable people. RookWeaver (talk) 05:27, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: As I said above, I don't see a problem with the change. Donald Albury 16:58, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Notable people" 

message: The article references Brian's thoughts multiple times and cites Brian's pages. Where are these pages from? What is Brian's last name? Filia Pirate (talk) 03:32, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops sorry, I found the book in the citations. I wasn't looking at the right spot, but I'll edit the page to identify the Brian. Filia Pirate (talk) 03:34, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who's Brian?