Jump to content

Talk:Ave Maria, Florida

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

Discussion

[edit]

I don't see how it's unconstitutional. Only Catholics are gonna live there, and if you don't like the rules, don't live there. The Republican 02:28, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This comment is old, but I wanted to respond to it anyways. Actually, the city has no "rule-making" authority, outside of its amazingly small scope of things such as zoning etc, so if it intends to try and go toe to toe legally with larger state and Federal bodies, its going to find itself quickly in trouble. This wouldn't be the first time in recent memory that people have attempted to found towns that may contravene the larger law of the land; the rash of militia homesteads in the early 90's had similar principles, even if they didn't have the money that the founders of Domino's can bring.
How much heat it expects to be under depends on how much the town wants to go out of its way to codify explicitly Catholic teachings. If, for instance, the town attempts to discriminate in zoning in order to pick and choose, or coerce businesses and people to adopt certain moral stances, they will find themselves under a very heavy litigious attack, not just from the ACLU and AU, but from a whole phalanx of business interests, whom frankly don't care as long as the moneys green. SiberioS (talk) 02:17, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Problem seeing the page

[edit]

I can access the talk page and the history but not the actual article. Does someone know the reason for that? --129.13.186.1 14:07, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings editors,

The following is a link that I wish to add to this article about the new Ave Maria, FL community. It is a page created to promote the town of Ave Maria created by a Catholic alumnus of another Catholic University having similar commonalities. This page gives information about the new town, its founder, links to the Ave Maria University and the new Private K 1-12 Grammar and Preparatory school that will soon be in operation there along with the university. It also provides information and services for purchasing a home in the new town.

www.LiveinAveMaria.com

Sincerely,

Jamesbohrer 01:28, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

James Bohrer LiveinAve.com


WikiProject class rating

[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 16:45, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

zip code?

[edit]

It would probably be helpful to have the zip code listed... The.helping.people.tick (talk) 05:41, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clearing some information

[edit]

Much of the information, including the location image, the coordinates, and the dates are correct for the city of Naples, FL. I will be clearing such information.--Abusing (talk) 19:05, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I want to make it clear that Ave Maria is not a part of Naples, FL and should not be labled so. This is completely false information.--Abusing (talk) 19:10, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Christian communities"?

[edit]

This article should not be listed under "Christian communities". It should be listed under "cults". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.215.147.95 (talk) 02:48, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Binksternet has deleted links claiming that doing so is required to comply with the following policies, but the two links in question do not violate these policies:

  • WP:WikiProject_Cities/US_Guideline#External_links ("Providing links to every commercial, educational, or other entity within the city is not appropriate for this section.") and
  • WP:ELOFFICIAL ("An official link is a link to a website or other Internet service that meets both of the following: 1. The linked content is controlled by the subject (organization or individual person) of the Wikipedia article; 2. The linked content primarily covers the area for which the subject of the article is notable.")

In this case, the commercial developer's link is appropriate for the same reasons the link to AveHerald.com and AveMariaLiving.com/dozens-of-ave-maria-links are appropriate, but the developer is NOT a governmental entity and does not control the town, which is far more broadly defined than the commercial developer (the town has thousands of residents and a thousand more people who work in town or study at the university), so the developer's website is NOT official and would not comply with the narrow rules Binksternet would like to impose for external links in this article.

It seems the policies more on point are:

These policies together anticipate as appropriate the links to the town's e-newspaper (AveHerald.com) and a site of over 100 links related to the town (AveMariaLiving.com) and the commercial developer (AveMaria.com), all of which provide a service to the town, to visitors and to those wishing to learn about the town. 74.5.191.140 (talk) 06:40, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The only official government site for Ave Maria is AveMariaDistrict.com. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.82.64.144 (talk) 15:00, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I just replaced the various odd links with the Ave Maria Stewardship Community District official website, as you recommend. All the other ones were too much for the U.S. City guideline which says we should add links to the "official city government, or the convention and visitors bureau. Providing links to every commercial, educational, or other entity within the city is not appropriate for this section. Information about such entities should actually be written into the article, with links to Wikipedia articles on notable entities. Remember, Wikipedia is not a linkfarm, and excessive lists of links on articles will generally be removed." I am in favor of text being added to the article describing any of the groups formerly linked in external links, such as the Ave Maria Development Company, The Ave Herald, AveMariaLiving.com, the Oratory Parish and the Annunciation of Ave Maria (a sculpture). If any of these things can be described by WP:Secondary sources then they can be added. Binksternet (talk) 00:11, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Text added with web addresses cited as references (rather than as links) as you suggested. Also, the adjective "controversial" was removed because this article is about the town, not about any controversies. All public figures become involved in controversies, and the primary place to write about them is in the wikipedia article about that person. 69.138.131.88 (talk) 22:14, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is rather hyperbolic to assume that all public figures are controversial. Tom Monaghan was controversial in creating Ave Maria, Florida, which is what this article is about. His controversial qualities are discussed in the article body as part of the topic, and this information is suitably summarized in the lead section. The word "controversial" is valid as a summary, per WP:LEAD. Binksternet (talk) 23:43, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Who or what governs this town?

[edit]

I'm wondering what the form of government is here? Why is this labelled by Wikipedia as a "Catholic Community" but the article says it's a planned college town? I've heard some disturbing things about this town including the foibles of the "owners" (?) and his beliefs, lawsuits regarding relocation of employees, etc. I'm willing to work on it a bit, but a little confused why no info appears here already as what is being said is quite controversial. al (talk) 00:47, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ave Maria, 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:

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) 10:54, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Controversies

[edit]

Shouldn't there be a section on controversies? After all, the whole concept of this town (given this is a real town and not some fenced in private property of a cult) violates several parts of the US constitution (mainly free speech and religious freedom). And lets be honest, how would America react if there was a similar community of muslim faith? 60.40.183.246 (talk) 15:20, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No there shouldn't unless there are reliable sources saying so. And for the second part of your question see Islamberg, New York. Inter&anthro (talk) 03:37, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ave Maria, 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:

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) 19:59, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ave Herald vs. Ave Maria Neighbours

[edit]

The Lfassbender edit in the commerce section removing the mention of the Ave Herald and expanding the description of Ave Maria Neighbours seems fine to me--it looks like the Herald is no longer a going concern, as of 2017.[1] The issue is that the current references point to the Herald and to 'Ave Maria Living', a previous incarnation of Neighbours--those references should probably be updated or removed.

References

  1. ^ http://www.aveherald.com/news/ave-maria-news/1876-merry-christmas-message-2017.html. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

Calling Tom Monaghan "controversial"

[edit]

I removed the word controversial as a qualifier to Tom Monaghan in the opening section. My change was reverted so I am starting a discussion here.

Adolph Hitler, Obama, Trump and the KKK are not listed as "controversial" on Wikipedia and yet somehow Tom Monaghan is? This is a subjective classification that adds no factual value and does not belong as a modifier in the article. Further - based on a quick search of other Wiki entries, there are no other times that I could find where Tom Monaghan is qualified as controversial. Bigdig23 (talk) 17:47, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think you have a point. True, the Washington Post source article does talk about Monaghan's decisions creating controversy, but a CEO's decisions creating controversy isn't exactly the same thing as that person being "controversial", especially if other reliable source articles about the person don't describe him/her that way. I think the bigger issue here is whether the whole Ave Maria project is/was controversial, after all the article is about Ave Maria, the community, not about Tom Monagham, the man. Goodtablemanners (talk) 01:56, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The town of Ave Maria was controversial in so far as the founder espoused Catholic views and considered imposing those on the town. However, the actual implementation was in-line with US law as far as I can find. For example, it was floated that the town ban contraceptive sales - but that never happened. Citizens vote in Collier county elections, the Sheriff responds to crime, there is a local fire department, etc. (I had to go deep to figure all of this out - including a call to the Sheriff's department to find out how policing worked for Ave Maria. Others who live in or have researched master planned communities probably knew all of this already - but it was fun for me to research it.)
The process of founding Ave Maria town is wrapped up into the founding of the university by the same name, since initially the town was founded to support the university. It's certainly fair to call that out - primarily because the town wouldn't exist in its current state except for the university. However, discussion of any controversies related to the university probably don't belong in this article - unless they are somehow tied to something specific about the town itself. It appeared to be controversial when Ave Maria College left Michigan and Ave Maria University was founded in Florida (I was able to find a lawsuit from some professors in Michaigan for example). However, even there the controversy seems centered around the closing in Michigan and not related to the new Ave Maria University established in Florida.
Regarding Monaghan, this article isn't the place to make a judgement call and call him controversial. First, I get that someone's religious views will basically always be considered controversial - and Monaghan is openly Catholic. Next, most CEOs make controversial decisions every day, and deal with the consequences. Those consequences could include increasing or decreasing market share, lawsuits and fines by regulators / disgruntled employees / competitors, etc. My view is that objectively Ave Maria's founding was controversial because decisions were made that were not universally agreed upon outside the decision makers. However, I see very few decisions in the public square that are universally approved of, making them controversial by definition. The creation of green space creates controversies, building a new building, demolishing an existing building, moving corporate HQ to a location, etc, etc. Either every decision is explicitly tagged as controversial, or it's implicitly accepted without the word "controversial" being added. Bigdig23 (talk) 17:38, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I would agree. Calling Monahan controversial at the beginning of the article about the town he largely created is sort of an indirect way of calling his whole project controversial. If there are good sources that call the town controversial, it's fine to use them, the article is on the town, but calling Monahan controversial at the start of the article is not encyclopedic. Goodtablemanners (talk) 19:12, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The idea of controversy should be introduced in the lead section. The formation of the city was steeped in controversy, with LOTS of media coverage saying exactly that. Monaghan could be called controversial relative to his actions in founding the town, or the town can be described as having a controversial founding. Either solution is fine. But controversy must be conveyed to the reader because it is part of the literature about the topic. Binksternet (talk) 22:10, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Take a look at what I just stuck in the history section - I tried to give some details, and see if that answers your concern Bigdig23 (talk) 22:40, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I also reworded the opening to capture your intent - and we now have details in the history to back it up. Bigdig23 (talk) 22:48, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please see my comment regarding the ecology section. There are three cites in the linked article that calls the Ave Maria development controversial. 57.135.233.22 (talk) 01:04, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Remove routine coverage warning?

[edit]

I am planning on removing the routine coverage warning since significant edits have happened over the last month. Posting here in case there are differing views. Bigdig23 (talk) 18:38, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ecology section

[edit]

The Florida Panther article has this which seems like something obvious to include in the ecology section --

Southern Florida is a fast-developing area, and many developments such as Ave Maria near Naples, have become extremely controversial for their location in prime panther habitat, and for the roads surrounding them that kill panthers at an ever increasing rate. 57.135.233.22 (talk) 00:57, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ave_Maria,_Florida&oldid=1231389793"