Jump to content

Talk:Valrico, Florida

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Extended content

School Discussion

[edit]

As I do not know about Valrico, Florida, I cannot confirm that Bloomingdale High School is the only high school in the area, though that seems to be the case. If anyone wishes to put school information back into this page, please consider the following recommendations:

  • The section should not be the first section in the page - the schools in an area are not that important.
  • The section should be more general - with (probably) only one high school, why does that high school merit an entire section? Thus it would make sense for the section to include all the other schools in the area. This could be added in with education demographics to possibly create a "Education" section, which would be more informative.
  • The information should be more meaningful than (paraphrasing from memory) "... was an 'A' school in ...". This really means nothing to me, and probably means nothing to most people in the world, as this grade system is apparently specific to Florida.

--Constantine Evans 06:25, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I've moved this down and put it under a section entitled "Education". Putting schools which aren't in Valrico, Florida in this section would seem inappropriate. Other than that, feel free to expand. anthony (see warning) 18:09, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Bloomingdale is the only school in the Valrico limits, although there are others just outside. I'll try to find some info on the middle and elementery schools here. Go B-Dale Bulls! Amerika 10:11, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Debate? it should be the schools located within the physical location. You talk about children in one area going to other schools in another community, That's happening throughout Hillsborough County. I lived in Tampa and when I was in the 8th grade, they sent me to a shool in Brandon. I don't think it makes sense to put Brandon's schools in the Tampa article. I agree with Amerika on this point --Moreau36 18:47, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfC on Hate Crime

[edit]

The consensus is to remove the sentence as being undue weight and not central to the town's history.

Cunard (talk) 01:18, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline#History. The sentence "In 1993 two white men attacked a black tourist, Christopher Wilson, doused him with gasoline and set him on fire while chanting "Die, Nigger, Die" clearly does not come close to qualifying as one of the recommended topics and should be removed. 13:13, 21 August 2019 (UTC)165.214.11.81 (talk)

  • That's a point.Jacona (talk) 22:23, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should be removed. Horrific crime is only tangentially related to Valrico. Perpetrators were from elsewhere, victim was from elsewhere, and described incident was committed elsewhere. The initial abduction occurred randomly at a strip mall in Valrico. Most coverage mentions town only in passing or not at all. As noted, this does not meet criteria for inclusion in town history.Glendoremus (talk) 19:28, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Vital policy consideration here: Any guidance found on a WikiProject is merely of WP:Advice pages status: it does not represent community consensus as to how a particular issue should generally be approached on a particular article. Unless a editorial principle goes through the usual WP:PROPOSAL process, or is at lease added to an existing WP:Policy or WP:guideline, it has no more weight as a supposed "default" approach than does the opinion of any single editor in a given discussion. This is a longstanding principle of community consensus (verified and codified by ArbCom in several cases no less) and a basic principle of the role and constraints on WikiProjects within our policies and processes: WikiProject organize work in certain content areas, but they are not allowed to create their own policy via fiat as a standard approach to all article's the WikiProject's volunteers deem to be within their purview. Again, until such time as a given approach/suggestion on a WikiProject page goes through the WP:PROPOSAL process at a centralized community discussion or relevant policy page, it is mere advice on a particular situation created by a small number of editors whose opinions have not been vetted by the community, and is therefore not a guideline or community consensus on how to approach the same issue on a particular article.
All of the above said, its still perfectly reasonable to oppose this particular content in this particular article, but the arguments should be predicated in bottom-up arguments based on WP:WEIGHT and other relevant policies: arguments which suggest we follow the "guideline" at the WikiProject are not arguments based in established community consensus regarding the editorial issue at hand and are likely to be ignored by the closer. However, there are additionally other substantial issues with this RfC, and its clear that the IP did not adequately familiarize themselves with the WP:RfC process, or it would be obvious to them that the non-neutral tone of the RfC prompt is unacceptable in the extreme. The prompt should be reworked in a neutral fashion, presenting the differing perspectives in a bit more detail and being neutral in its presentation of each.
Personally leaning towards removing: I'll need to look at the sources in more detail, but my initial impressions are that this event is probably not central enough to the town's notability. That could change, however, once looking into the sourcing: for a crime of this nature, it certainly would not be impossible that there is a lot more material out there establishing WP:WEIGHT for inclusion. For a certainty, if this event were to happen in today's media climate, the inundation of sourcing would make that weight determination pretty hard to ignore. But for a more than 25-year-old crime, even one as brutal and heinous as the one here, taking place before the internet era news revolution, it may be that there will only be a handful of sources discussing the matter, which would probably not be enough to justify inclusion here, even if it is the case that little else that is more notable / receives more coverage in WP:RS can be said about the town. Snow let's rap 06:23, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should definitely be removed. An encyclopedia is not the place for such a melodramatic description. Information about the Crime Rate of the area is fine, but not a vivid description of a single crime. e.g. With a crime rate for both violent and property crime combined of 9 per 1,000 residents, the crime rate in Valrico is one of the lower rates in America among communities of all sizes (lower than 69% of America's communities). One's chance of becoming a victim of crime in Valrico is one in 106. https://www.neighborhoodscout.com/fl/valrico/crime Peter K Burian (talk) 14:15, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Valrico,_Florida&oldid=1200534997"