Talk:Virginia, Minnesota

Paul Metsa

I removed the zero-content link to Paul Metsa. If you can find a better link than to a blank wiki page, feel free to re-add it.

Re-removed empty link to Paul Metsa. If an editor feels this empty link is important, they can discuss here. --EpochFail (talk) 21:57, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Public Safety Information

I am a criminologist, and I am attempting to use my area of expertise to improve a Wikipedia article. The small town of Virginia, Minnesota has one of the highest crime rates in the state and country. With less than 10k people, that is one of the most notable facts about the town. From my perspective, the public has a right to know accurate public safety information, and I am trying to understand what valid reason someone has for repeatedly taking the information down. I am happy to talk about the best way to expand on Virginia's Wikipedia page collaboratively.

Few specific concerns have been expressed, but I look forward to hearing about them. One editor expressed unspecified concern about the source data. The information on the Road Snacks blog comes from the FBI Uniform Crime Reports (UCR), and I added a citation to it, despite the raw data being less useful for lay readers compared to Road Snacks' analysis. The data used on the Neighborhood Scout website is actually an improvement on FBI data, as explained on this page. I read over their methodology, and I am unsure of why someone would doubt whether it is a reliable source, but let me know if you have specific concerns so that we can talk through them.

Having read Wikipedia's page on dispute resolution, I regret and apologize for making assumptions about the motives of other editors, and I look forward to focusing on the content from now on.

Zsick (talk) 16:13, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

@Zsick: First you said here you are making this edit because it is "the town I grew up in", now you are a criminologist (who only edits Virginia, Minnesota). Magnolia677 (talk) 16:29, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

I am a criminologist. I grew up in Virginia. This is the first Wikipedia article I have ever edited. Do you have a question about the content? Your focus on me as the editor is inappropriate and violates Wikipedia's policy on dispute resolution.

Zsick (talk) 16:54, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

The lead section should be "a summary of its most important contents", per MOS:LEAD. Specifics about crime should be included with other demographics, per WP:USCITIES. I will move it there; this seems a good compromise to improve the article for readers. Magnolia677 (talk) 09:37, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your opinion. However, I have already noted that the reason the nationally-high crime rate is in the lead is that it is perhaps the most notable fact about the town with 8000 people. As a criminologist, I assure you that is noteworthy, but all you have to do is look at the front page of a newspaper to see the value that the public puts on information about crime. Frankly, it is suspicious that you are concerned with hiding Virginia's nationally-high crime rate from the public a month before the election. Can you explain why you have such passionate feelings for keeping this information off of the Wikipedia page? Do you have any conflicts of interest that should be disclosed? Do you have any family running for office, or who work for the police or prosecutor's office? You have to disclose it if you do. Zsick (talk) 15:10, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Stop accusing other editors on such utterly flimsy reasoning. Stop edit warring. Consider this a formal warning. This information does not belong in the lede, as it gives an unbalanced summary of the article content. Furthermore, your sources are rather dubious regarding WP:RS, they claim to be "infotainment", and the FBI page you link to does not support the information you claim, please give a more precise link. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:06, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

What does a "formal warning" mean? I'm sorry, but Im not sure what you even mean. Other editors are accusing ME with flimsy reasoning, and I am being forced to defend myself on a personal level, which is against Wikipedia policy if I am not wrong. I am simply trying to make a contribution to Wikipedia, and I am being bullied for it. Your opinion about the lede is noted but subjective, and the front page of every newspaper being filled with stories about crime attests to the value the public places on crime statistics. I provided the source data (FBI UCR) for the site that claims to be "Infotainment," despite it being less useful for lay readers. The FBI UCR data DO support the info included on the Wikipedia page, but it is raw data, which is why I also included the secondary source, which includes the analysis (the results of which are supported by the second analysis I cited). The government routinely produces crime statistics and makes them publicly available for third parties to analyze. This is how the government disseminates public safety information. Third parties are the only entities (besides cities themselves) with an incentive to do data analysis for small towns like Virginia. Again, this is literally my area of expertise, and I have no ulterior motive for making these edits. I am happy to make any improvements or adjustments that are needed to address your concerns. However, your attacks are totally unwarranted and unwelcome. If you believe I am doing something incorrectly, please assume the best motives, per Wikipedia' policy on dispute resolution. Zsick (talk) 16:28, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Also, are you saying that information about the water tower belongs in the lead, but the fact that a tiny town in Northern Minnesota has a sky-high crime rate does not? If so, I am wondering how you interpret Wikipedia's policy to support your position? The reason that travel blogs and real estate websites refer to public safety information and not water towers or town mottos is that the public cares a lot about crime and very little about water towers or town mottos. Again, I honestly don't understand your reasoning, and your hostility toward accurate information that the public would want to know is concerning. As a new editor and longtime financial supporter of Wikipedia, this really isn't what I expected the editor community to be like. I look forward to finding more supportive editors willing to help me improve my contributions rather than attacking and bullying me for reasons I won't speculate on (can I ask why you haven't questioned anyone else's motives in this matter?).Zsick (talk) 16:47, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

I've come here from WP:ANI. Let me offer an unbiased view. I know nothing of Virginia, Minnesota. The claim that it is the town/city with the highest crime rate (per capita?) in the USA is certainly information that should be included in the article, if it can be reliably sourced. It may even merit inclusion in the lede. A request for comment is probably the best way to thrash this issue out. That said, edit warring never ends well. It stops here and now, for all editors. Mjroots (talk) 18:39, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

The website being cited for the 'high crime rate' is clearly computer-generating reports on communities, using stock phraseology (pick a random nearby location on the website, and compare the reports to see this for yourselves). I see no reason at all to think that such reports are of any more reliability than the data they are presumably derived from. Which leads me to suggest that such data should be cited instead, if it can be found. I'm sure any proficient criminologist should be able to point to such data, if it exists. And I'd expect any competent criminologist understand how small sample sizes can make claims about 'high crime rates' of questionable value. 109.157.102.59 (talk) 18:54, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I know that a smaller sample size gives a higher error rate. That is why I questioned whether the figures were on a per capita basis. As I said at ANI, find the info in a high quality source and it will have a better chance of inclusion. Mjroots (talk) 18:59, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, I was really replying to Zsick above - the way indenting works on WP talk pages always trips me up. So yeah, we need a proper source - preferably one that indicates that this is meaningful data, rather than random statistical noise. 109.157.102.59 (talk) 19:05, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

One anonymous editor claims to be from this town and claims to be a criminologist. That is irrelevant because anyone can edit any Wikipedia article no matter where they live and we do not require professional credentials or give any more authority to editors who claim such expertise. Of great concern is the observation that an election is coming up which indicates a possible motive of being able to say "Read the Wikipedia article! Crime is out of control and you need to vote for tough-on-crime candidate X!"

Wikipedia does not exist to right great wrongs and strict neutrality is a core content policy.

Infotainment blogs and computer generated aggregators of statistics are not reliable sources on Wikipedia. If the crime situation is so bad, it ought to be easy to find coverage in books, newpapers and magazines. I oppose inclusion at this time. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:27, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

@ Mjroots I cited the FBI data. The secondary sources I cited are real estate and travel websites that have an incentive to provide unbiased, accurate information to inform people who are traveling or moving. This is routine practice, and you can verify the accuracy of the information from the source of your choice, if you think I am cherry picking sources to cite. They discuss their methodology in depth, and as a "proficient criminologist," I can attest that the information in valid. Indeed, it is more rigorous than the methodology used by most newspapers (and probably some academics).

Actually, sample sizes aren't relevant here. This is count data. In other words, it isn't a "sample" of the crimes committed, but a count of the total number of crimes reported to authorities. Larger cities are expected to have more crime because they have more people. A city with a million people will always have more crime than a town with a thousand people, but that doesn't mean the town is safer. To know the relative safety of the two communities, you would have to adjust for population size by looking at the crime RATE. Calculating the rate is merely dividing the number of people by the crimes committed (math, not statistics). The two secondary sources I cited do this analysis for the public, which is why I felt they were worth citing in addition to the FBI data. Zsick (talk) 19:56, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Sources such as these which just combine crime counts with population data cannot be used to support statements such as "most dangerous city". You need to find articles or sections in books that analyze the data and look at what is going on and then support the statements you want to make. Virginia is a small city that serves as the business and commercial hub for a large area as well as serving a large transient tourist population. The area has also has many rural summer residents. So merely dividing the crimes by the number of people who are permanent residents does not accurately represent the situation. Other small cities in the area have an even higher apparent crime rate since the areas considered have such a large summer-only population. Wikipedia's requirement for reliable sources means finding references that take all of this into account in the analysis. Neither the RoadSnacks site nor the NeighborhoodScouts site do this kind of analysis. The NeighborhoodScouts content is automatically generated from the numbers. StarryGrandma (talk) 20:51, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Can you explain what you mean regarding your concerns about the phrase "most dangerous city" and the crime rate? What would "dangerous" be based on if not the crime rate? Also, the simplicity of combining crime counts with populations is what allows the information to be automated, which actually increases accuracy (contrary to the concerns of another editor). This is because most analytical errors arise from human mistakes or biases. Further, this is often the best available information, because few academics care to write books about small midwestern towns. I don't mean to be argumentative, but suggesting that an analysis must take the number of summer residents into account seems peculiar and impossible. Policymakers and academics alike regularly use crime rates in their analyses and to inform policy decisions. Thank you in advance. Zsick (talk) 20:54, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Zsick, you are a new editor and it appears to me that you do not yet have a well-developed understanding of what constitutes a reliable source on Wikipedia. You can ask for an analysis of these sources at the reliable sources noticeboard but I think you will get the same answer there. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:03, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Accuracy would be saying the crime rate per permanent resident is x. You added the sentence Residents have a one in 26 chance of becoming a victim of either violent or property crime, giving the rural community one of the highest crime rates in the country compared to communities of all sizes. That is an analysis that ignores a lot of what is going on. Were the crimes committed by residents of the city or by outsiders? It isn't a rural community by the way according to your references. Were the residents or the tourists or the people in town from the surrounding area to shop, visit the bars, or go to the movies the victims of the crimes? StarryGrandma (talk) 21:07, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

You’re right. If FBI Uniform Crime Reports don’t count as a reliable source, I’m still learning what counts as a “reliable source“ on Wikipedia, and I will absolutely be learning about it and asking for additional outside review. I cannot follow the logic of your arguments so please correct me if this response seems off, but the crime rates are what they are regardless of whether crime is committed by residents or tourists. Sometimes officials never learn who committed the crime, and it is irrelevant to the crime rate. Zsick (talk) 22:20, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

The reason I mentioned the election is because I originally made this contribution several years ago, and it seemed strange that there was a sudden flurry of interest in it from multiple people only recently. I added the "factoid" about the high crime rate soon after I learned about it (in the course of my actual work). I also saw it as a way of "getting my foot in the door" in terms of learning to edit Wikipedia pages. I love Wikipedia and have used it since its inception, and I have been a financial supporter for years (I don't know if there is a way to verify that, or if it matters).

To be clear, I moved away from Virginia decades ago and have absolutely no conflicts of interest with any organizations, candidates or local political leaders, or anything else connected to politics, profit, etc. that is influencing my behavior here. Indeed, I am neglecting my actual work to engage in this important exchange. I appreciate everyone who has shared links and information about the process I should follow to learn the rules and conventions of editing and resolve this conflict. I regret knowing I have probably replied too hastily and emotionally at times and am committed to improving to ensure situations like this can be resolved more quickly in the future. I will begin by going back over the information everyone has shared about Wikipedia policies ASAP.

My interest in keeping the information public is that it is broadly interesting, important, and potentially useful for the public to know. I also see no reason it shouldn't be in the lead, outside of some apparent distaste. It is not me calling Virginia "dangerous." In this case, the numbers speak for themselves. As someone who was born in Virginia, the high crime rate is among the notable facts I tell people about my hometown, alongside the fact that I was born in the same hospital as Chris Pratt (actor) and Robert Mondavi (winemaker who helped put Napa Valley on the map). And a citizen, I would want to know this information about the place I lived. Considering I don't see a valid reason NOT to include the information at the top of the article, I feel some responsibility as the author to stand by my contribution, and I will do whatever is necessary to satisfy your concerns. As it is, however, some of the demands are frankly confusing or unrealistic. Zsick (talk) 00:35, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Removing the Crime section

I am removing the Crime section due to lack of reliable sources for the statements about the city rank given in Wikipedia's voice. The first reference is the FBI site that provides the crime data. The FBI site not only does not do rankings (see the Minnesota page) but says not to use the data for rankings. The FBI site for 2019 prominently links to the FBI's two page "Caution Against Ranking" document explaining why the their Uniform Crime Reporting data is not appropriate for comparisons. To quote the FBI document: "Data users should not rank locales because there are many factors that cause the nature and type of crime to vary from place to place. UCR statistics include only jurisdictional population figures along with reported crime, clearance, or arrest data. Rankings ignore the uniqueness of each locale." A bulleted list of 13 reasons follows.

The other two references are from two websites of dubious reliability, RoadSnacks and www.neighborhoodscout.com, which used the data to create rankings anyway. They assume that every victim of a reported crime is a permanent resident of the cities where the crimes are reported and divide the number of crimes by the population of the city. The second reference, RoadSnacks, ranks Bemidji, a Minnesota tourist area and regional commercial center of an area with thousands of summer residents as the worst place in Minnesota using this assumption, saying "Folks in Bemidji had a 1 in 13 chance of being the victim of a property crime over 2019." It treats Virginia in the same way. Virginia is the commercial and entertainment hub of an industrialized mining area encompassing a string of smaller mining towns and a lake area with many summer residents and tourists. Crimes are reported by both residents and visitors. The third source, www.neighborhoodscout.com, calculates the crime rate per 1000 residents, then says misleadingly "One's chance of becoming a victim of either violent or property crime here is one in 24." StarryGrandma (talk) 18:17, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Suburb of Duluth

If Virginia is a suburb of Duluth then Rochester, Eau Claire, St Cloud, Mankato, and La Crosse are suburbs of the Twin Cities. It makes more sense, after all the Twin Cities are much bigger and there's much more in between them and those places. 75.27.37.89 (talk) 11:28, 27 February 2022 (UTC)