A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on August 28, 2004, August 28, 2005, August 28, 2006, August 28, 2007, August 28, 2011, September 8, 2023, and September 8, 2024.

This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Florida Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Florida. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.FloridaWikipedia:WikiProject FloridaTemplate:WikiProject FloridaFlorida Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Cities This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities Transport: Maritime This article is within the scope of WikiProject Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TransportWikipedia:WikiProject TransportTemplate:WikiProject TransportTransport ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Maritime task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Text and/or other creative content from St. Augustine, Florida was copied or moved into History of St. Augustine, Florida with this edit on July 7, 2016. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

It is actually a fact that St-Augustine was established by the French and then the Spaniards came and kicked them out since they were too close to Mexico.

In fact, as the text shows, they were two attempts by the French to establish themselves in Florida but they failed because they were attacked by Spain. It is common that everything is done to provide understatement of the French attempts of colonizations in America. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.162.192.109 (talk) 00:17, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I added a short description of the Klan attack on Dr. Hayling and 3 other NAACP activists. For some reason someone had deleted an previous description of this incident which is well known in St. Augustine and is considered a significant event in the town's civil rights history. Brucehartford (talk) 16:27, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

216.240.0.28 edited the article to change the phrase, "is the oldest" to "claims to be the oldest". This wording insinuates that St. Augustine is not the oldest continually occupied European settlement in the United States, or that there is no proof that it is. Barring some evidence to the contrary, St. Augustine is the oldest continually occupied European settlement in the territory of the United States. When a claim has no opposition and can be supported by fact, it simply is... it doesn't "claim to be". NamcoFL 04:52, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)

Word on the street is that St. Augustine has the only surviving ramparts in the United States. Anyone kknow if it's true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.41.163.240 (talk) 21:46, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think this page needs to be Wikified - there probably are plenty of items in the article that can be linked, but I'm not familiar enough to do it. --Bubba73 19:45, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've spent most of my life knowing of St. Augustine as the place in what became the United States to have been continuously inhabited by Europeans and their descendants longer than any other place. I've just come across something strange, though, that makes me wonder. If you go to www.desotocavernspark.com and click on "History" at the left and then click on the "Hernando DeSoto & USA's oldest city" subsection (at the left, but not so far left), you'll find these words:

The arrival of Hernando DeSoto and his Spanish expedition in 1540 AD [sic] marked the beginning of recorded history in Alabama. As a matter of fact, Childersburg, the city nearest DeSoto Caverns, is the oldest continuously occupied[-by-Europeans-and-their-descendants] settlement in the U.S., predating St. Augustine by 25 years.

What else do we know about this claim? Is it, indeed, "a matter of fact"? I'm quite curious. President Lethe 03:38, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, they're both wrong. San Juan, Puerto Rico is older than both those cities, and Puerto Ricans are US citizens. 12.172.37.45 17:31, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to continental United States for more clarity. -Ebyabe 18:45, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

St. Augustine is the oldest contiunously inhabited by Europeans, Desoto did not have Europeans supply there needs as a settlement and so it can't be said that it was or were ever continuously inhabited why? Because the last of Desoto expedition end up in Mexico, now as far as oldest if you say just having Europeans in the area then, well what about Brandton Florida? and the Tampa bay area their are proof that there are Desoto's still here.

Now as far as Puerto Rico it is not a state of the U.S. just a territory and not inhabited in the U.S. north American. The real place is Jaxs Florida and fort caroline before S. A. because after the French the spanish were there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ffulghum (talk • contribs) 18:26, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We say "continuously inhabited" because there were older settlements (and expeditions) that were abandoned or wiped out. Fort Caroline is one example; Jacksonville has not been "continuously inhabited" by Europeans since then. And we say "continental US" because there are older settlements in US territory in Puerto Rico.Cúchullain ^t/c 02:42, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The history of Childersburg tries to build its claim as the oldest settlement: http://childersburg.qscend.com/content/108/default.aspx. However even if it could be proved that Robles and Feryada had descendants (which the article doesn't) there are several flaws with the argument. Any descendants are clearly identified as Indians by the 1832 treaty, and there seems to be no direct continuancy of settlement.The article itself says:

that the site of Coca was noted to be the area in proximity to the present town of Childersburg, Alabama.

That doesnt mean that it was the same settlement, just that the village was close to the present town. To prove continuancy of settlement someone would need to explain the name change at Childersburg at the least. St. Augustine has been continously inhabited by Europeans and thier descendant since its founding. Even at the low point, when the Spanish handed it over the British, at least one Spanish citizen stayed on after the British arrived providing continuancy.

Thanks. It's unusual for me not to do the research myself; but, once in a blue moon, I feel like just asking someone else. I figured there must be a reason for which I'd always heard the St. Augustine claim and never the Childersburg one. ... *Sigh.* Yet another reason to be annoyed about those who run DeSoto Caverns. President Lethe 18:36, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the image, "St. Augustine in 1760, while under Spanish control," large hills or mountains can be seen in the background. I live in St. John's County, and there are certainly no hills of this size. Is this really an image of St. Augustine?

Artists in that time would often exaggerate details in their paintings. This image is probably an example of this. Akubra 01:51, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would just like to say I live in St. John's, and that there are no Mountains anywhere in Florida Kenny51194 01:15, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When did he ever live there? Far as I know, he grew up in Gainesville, then moved to California. A citation of some sort would be nice. --Ebyabe 18:34, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Petty did, at one time, own a house on the beach in Crescent Beach, some miles south of St. Augustine. On a reasonably regular basis he ate at the "Sonny's" barbecue restaurant in St. Augustine on US 1 South. They used to ask him to sign his bills, which they used to attach to the wall near the cash register. But to the best of my knowledge, as a thirty year resident, he never lived in St. Augustine proper.Annodomini1923 03:52, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. He owned a place just a tad south of St. Augustine Beach in Crescent. I don't know if he still owns that house or not, but whenever he was in town, you would always hear and endless stream of Tom Petty "sighting" stories. My personal favorite- He and Bob Dylan riding moped scooters into the Lil Champ on A1A South early in the AM. True or not, I don't know, but he and Dylan are known to be pretty tight friends, so it wouldn't be all that outlandish. Anyway, Petty is a "resident" sort of like how Steve Spurrier is a resident; they both own/owned residences here, even though they don't live here full time. --FactsAndHonesty 10:59, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Tom Petty house was on Atlantic View Avenue in the Anastasia Hills, just north of historically black Butler Beach area--ironically just down the street from the house at 5480 Atlantic View which was rented for Dr. Martin Luther King in the summer of 1964 and then promptly shot up and firebombed by racists. The Petty House was shingled, and used to sport a sign saying "Buy American," as I recall. I heard he lost it to his wife in a divorce. It is still standing, though. As to whether it's in St. Augustine, all the places down there (and beyond) have a St. Augustine address, so I think it's fair to include it. --[Historian]March 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.106.142.79 (talk) 21:50, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article states that St. Augustine, Florida is the oldest continously-inhabited European settlement in the United States of America.

Is the word "European" necessary? As far as I'm aware, the only continuously-inhabited American Indian cities which survive to this day, are located in Mexico and Peru; and not in any U.S. jurisdiction.

I'm not as learned about American Indian history as I would like to be, so if any of you are aware of older American Indian settlements in the USA, please feel free to respond, as it might result in more content, and relevant information for the article.

Pine 18:41, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good question. There are certainly claims that towns in what is now the US have in fact been continuously inhabited since pre-European times, for instance Tucson, Arizona, but it's a sketchy distinction - Tucson obviously wasn't called Tucson back then. I think it's best to leave it as "European", since that's an inarguable fact.--Cúchullain ^t/c 18:53, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Hopi village of Oraibi has been continuously inhabited since about 1100 AD, much longer than St. Augustine. Many settlements of the Pueblo peoples in the Southwestern United States have a similarly ancient history. Also, as Cuchullain pointed out, many modern American cities were founded on pre-Columbian settlements. Of course, most have undergone name changes, but not all of them. Onondaga, New York, has a white majority today, but it was once the Iroquois capital. --216.164.136.201 (talk) 19:41, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are a number of continuously inhabited pueblos in New Mexico and elsewhere in the Southwest that are much older than St. Augustine. The Acoma Pueblo in New Mexico, for example, which dates to the 12th Century (or possibly earlier) is a National Historic Landmark and according to Smithsonian Magazine "is regarded as the oldest continuously inhabited community in the United States." The Taos Pueblo of New Mexico is a World Heritage site and is considered by archaeologists to date back almost 1,000 years. Brucehartford (talk) 16:42, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is a useful distinction, even if there are no other continuously occupied cities within the Continental United States. This is because European migration and occupation is a significant historical occurrence. The status of other, perhaps older, continuously occupied cities or settlements could be given parenthetically, indicating whether they do or do not exist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alan.A.Mick (talk • contribs) 16:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

is located here?!!! 84.56.11.242 09:34, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Depending on your definition, yes. :) -Ebyabe 12:46, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Staugustineseal.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:25, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why does the Saint Augustine page keep getting edited? Everytime someone posts something about the current battle between local artists and the city commission, it is edited off the site within minutes. If someone is allowed to post information on the City's racial discrimination, why can't someone post an article on the corrupt city commission, the violation of constitutional rights, or the rising homeless population? Buddychrist1 04:18, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's unsourced original research. The city's civil rights history are well known and documented.--Cúchullain ^t/c 12:15, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This one kinda borders on self-promotion. Keeping in mind that what constitutes notability isn't simply the threshold of google hits (particularly for a commercial operation where web presence is cultivated) I would like to hear opinions regarding keeping or deleting Barry Barnett as a notable resident. My personal opinion is that he isn't --LoverOfArt 02:55, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, no objections in over a month- it's removed. --LoverOfArt (talk) 23:06, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

--Does anyone know where I can find a link to the photographs of James Brock pouring muriatic acid into the pool with black and white protesters? --ShadowCrew (talk) 21:46, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See http://www.crmvet.org/images/imgstrug.htm. Brucehartford (talk) 16:19, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

--There's a photo of Brock's redefinition of "Southern Hospitality" with this 2000 article about the effort to make the Monson, an important American civil rights landmark, disappear. As one city staffer said "We don't want to preserve THAT history." --Historian, March 2009

[[1]]"Civil Rights Landmark May be Razed." _______________________________

The image Image:St Johns County Fl Seal.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:24, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is this only happening to me? The two images under the infobox are shifted way over to the right making the page too big to be seen on one screen (I have to slide over to the right to see the two images). I can't figure out how to fix it. Tex (talk) 16:54, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is a flag on this section disputing its neutrality, but I don't see any discussion on this page. I think the main problems with this section are its tone or style (too many superlatives) and of citations from reliable sources. It could also be shortened and made easier to read. — ℜob C. alias ᴀʟᴀʀoʙ 20:39, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I also don't know why this section is flagged. I drafted the original section and it has had only a few minor edits since then. The events I described are all well-known and well-documented. I will add some additional citations. I'm not sure what is meant by "too many superlatives." As I understand this process, who ever posted the "disputed" tag was supposed to explain why on these Talk pages, but that was not done. Does anyone know how to resolve this? Thanks. Brucehartford (talk) 16:33, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about its neutrality, but it seems much too long. We're using up more than an entire screen's worth of text on events that happened over a couple of years in the history of a 444-year-old city. A spinoff article (such as "St. Augustine during the Civil Rights movement") would make sense. 24.11.127.26 (talk) 20:20, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I greatly condensed the civil rights section of this St. Augustine article and moved the old material into a new St. Augustine Movement article. Brucehartford (talk) 19:01, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can see that the opening for this article has had some discussion in the past, so rather than just jumping into the article, I thought to bring it up here (on the 444th birthday of St. Augustine!). Right now the article has the sentence:

It is the oldest continuously occupied European established city, and the oldest port, in the continental United States.

This is pretty much a quote from the Nat'l Historic Landmark program info. The phrase "continental United States" seems wrong to me. I image it was used to exclude San Juan and other settlements in Puerto Rico -- which is a territory, rather than the United States proper (i.e. 50 states + D.C.) -- but it also implies that there are older European settlements in Hawaii or Alaska (which I cannot imagine to be the case). Of course there are logical issues with categorizing Alaska apart from "continental" as well. — Eoghanacht ^talk 16:46, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Continental United States" has a long history, although the Wikipedia page for it redirects to Contiguous United States. Yes, it is used here to exclude Puerto Rico, and yes, it also appears to exclude Hawaii and Alaska, but I think it is harmless and a more felicitous phrase than something like "the 50 states and D.C., but not Puerto Rico". -- Donald Albury 14:50, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The right word is not "privateer" but corsaire or pirate.

Our article on Annapolis_Royal,_Nova_Scotia says that Annapolis Royal is "the oldest continuous European settlement in North America, north of St. Augustine, Florida."

Our article on St. Augustine says it's "the oldest continuously occupied European-established city and port in the continental United States."

It seems that the "continental United States" part could even be expanded to "continental United States and Canada" ? Is there an older European settlement in Hawaii or Alaska? Continental Mexico? --Sonjaaa (talk) 18:18, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It depends. "Continental United States" is there because there are older European-established settlements in Puerto Rico, a U.S. territory. There are no older European-established settlements in Hawaii, Alaska, the rest of the United States, or Canada. There are many older settlements in Mexico (the first was Veracruz), Central America (beginning with Nombre de Dios in Panama) and the Caribbean (beginning with Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic).--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:23, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An image used in this article, File:Replicas of the Medici lions at the Bridge of Lions .jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 07:01, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello I thought I would give you a heads up that I will be making an entry regarding the time period of 1605 into this page. This was known as the "Period of Friendship". Great job you all have done with this page, I look forward to bringing some more meaningful content to it. I love St.Augustine --Ourhistory153 (talk) 12:48, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to invite fellow Wikipedians interested in Florida history to join in our new project page for celebrating our state's 500th anniversay at Viva_Florida_500 Please review and join in getting this project off the ground. It's more than just about Ponce de Leon and his landing it is also about other cultures and what new content we can bring into Wiki such as adding new information about the Native Cultures that were here when this period of discovery began.--Ourhistory153 (talk) 14:26, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

These are the foreign language names of the St. Augustine Historical Society, from the tourist brochures:

• French: L'Association Historique de St. Augustine
• Japanese: セント・オウガスティン歴史協会
• Spanish: Sociedad de Historia de San Agustín

WhisperToMe (talk) 16:46, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No pre European history section...Indians are mentioned in the article not specifically at least in the introduction to the history section..most Wikipedia articles do in US place sections. 66.177.244.25 (talk) 03:34, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has put an opinionated argument for the Michelle O'Connell suicide. It does not belong in the History of St. Augustine or even in the history. If you want to fight that battle go to other more appropriate places. The sources cited have theories but the facts are it was ruled and still is considered a suicide after being examined by multiple agencies and multiple State Attorneys and Medical Examiners... Not the place for your argument.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wildthang22 (talk • contribs) 22:02, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A neutral reporting of events in the city is not an "argument", despite the desire of the Sheriff's Office to depict such reporting and the events it describes differently. See this page. Carlstak (talk) 22:36, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Sheriff's Office was NOT the only Agency involved in looking at this suicide and The NY Times posted a story, not an official investigation. Whatever they tried to portray is NOT official and therefore does not belong here and The NY Times is far from neutral, they write stories to sell papers and pay experts for conclusions that help their story. Brad King a State Attorney looked at this case, he is totally from out of the area, his findings, suicide. Again there are plenty of avenues for an argumentative fight, this is NOT the place. If the official findings were changed then by all means list it but its clearly argumentative at BEST. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wildthang22 (talk • contribs) 12:27, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you are the one engaging in an argumentative fight. All newspapers write stories to sell newspapers, that's what newspapers do. A newspaper account is an acceptable source for Wikipedia. Sorry. but you don't make the rules here. Carlstak (talk) 12:48, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever the facts of the case (and they are certainly far from clear -- the official state conclusion is that there is insufficient evidence to prosecute, so we'll probably have to leave it at that), the incident is a single event and does not bear on the long-term history of the city. The article is supposed to give a general, long-term history of the city, so focusing on this single event lends undue weight to the event. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:12, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've contributed substantially to the editing of this article, and added most of its refs. While I think that a separate article on the history of St. Augustine, Florida is a good idea, I think the content already here is a good, short overview of that subject, and should be left as it is. I propose that an article with greatly expanded information on the history of the city should be started.

My question is, would M2545 be willing to do some of the heavy lifting required to help create this new article? Carlstak (talk) 17:35, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See Draft:History of St. Augustine, Florida which consists entirely of content copied and pasted from St. Augustine, Florida#History. Please feel free to edit and/or move the draft into the main namespace. -- M2545 (talk) 18:12, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds like you don't want to do any of the work. I categorically oppose your original suggestion. Carlstak (talk) 18:24, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We need to begin somewhere, so why not begin with the draft? Also, please assume good faith. Thanks. -- M2545 (talk) 18:29, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you made the suggestion in good faith; I don't see the need to move the content already here. Carlstak (talk) 18:56, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The "History" section in the main "St. Augustine" article currently contains 71,868 bytes, a size that "probably should be divided" according to the Wikipedia article size guideline. It seems sensible to condense the main article's "History" section into a much shorter summary, and to expand the new History of St. Augustine, Florida article. Thoughts? Of course I would help with summary and/or expansion. -- M2545 (talk) 12:46, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I did check the size yesterday, but don't forget that many of those bytes are in the ref markup—the section had only 17 or so citations when I started adding more in mid-April 2015. The whole article stood at 58,691 bytes then. I will concede that you have a point, though.

One reason I want to keep the history section here is that St. Augustine being a very popular tourist town, many of its visitors are surely checking this article for historical information, especially since it is near the top of Google search results. For several years the article was full of incredibly non-NPOV and unsourced material: I have no idea why the established and trustworthy editors (some of whom live in northeast Florida and certainly knew better) watching it allowed racist and unhistorical text to remain so long. Consequently, I wanted to be sure that visitors could find reliably sourced historical content here to counteract the misinformation they are fed by other sources and guides. I fear that most of those users will not click through to another article, and will continue to be misled by misinformed people, or others who may have a mercenary motive.

I suggest that we wait a couple of days and see if other editors chime in with their comments. If no one else opposes the move to a new article, and you still insist on it, I would request that you be so kind as to allow me to write a short summary supported by reliable references, of course, and subject to your input, before moving the draft into the main namespace. And if you don't mind, I would like to make the move in that case, as per your suggestion. Anyone can check my bona fides by looking at the history and biography articles I've created, listed under my contributions. Carlstak (talk) 15:00, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good points, and excellent plan! Thanks. -- M2545 (talk) 15:59, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've created the article, History of St. Augustine, Florida, as we discussed, and wanting to give a decent overview rather than just a couple-of-paragraphs-long summary, made a bold edit to replace the moved History section with a shorter version. There's been plenty of time for other editors to comment; I hope you'll forgive me, after all this work, I just couldn't wait to get it up.;-) Carlstak (talk) 04:05, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry I missed this discussion. I think it was a good idea to branch the content on history into a dedicated form while keeping a summary here. It looks like both are good starts.--Cúchullain ^t/c 13:03, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Cuchullain. Carlstak (talk) 14:13, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on St. Augustine, 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://archive.is/20160602200744/http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2015/SUB-EST2015.html to http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2015/SUB-EST2015.html

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) 20:33, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1) That sentence is completely grammatical, please tell me what's wrong with "it is the oldest continuously inhabited European-established settlement in the United States proper (Puerto Rico was settled earlier)."

2) Although it doesn't appear to be especially common, "United States proper" does refer to the 50 states and D.C.; it's even used in the article on territories itself. They may be citizens, but, as the article itself says, they can't vote for president and they don't have full representation in Congress, so no, they're not part of the US proper. Esszet (talk) 16:24, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Carlstak: Did you not see this? By the way, according to Wikiproject Puerto Rico, Puerto Rico is of but not in the US (not something I completely agree with), so you don't really have a leg to stand on here, I don't even know why you keep trying. Esszet (talk) 01:28, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, I didn't see your post; I should have looked. I am working long hours on a real-world project, and in the evening I check my watchlist for vandalization and incorrect edits to articles. The particular sentence that you changed has been a subject of dispute over the years, so I tend to revert such changes as a matter of course, especially when I have limited time. I think you've made your case, and I have no problem with the change, so I'll self-revert. Regards, Carlstak (talk) 01:49, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. Esszet (talk) 02:13, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Saint Augustine, Florida.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:26, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It would be helpful to have a pronunciation key. Is it OG-əs-teen (like the month) or og-US-tin (like the saint)? --Macrakis (talk) 16:30, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about others, but as a life-long resident of Florida, I pronounce it like the month. - Donald Albury 17:42, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not that it proves anything, I've lived in St. Augustine since the mid '60s, and I've never heard anyone pronounce the name of the city as "og-US-tin" like the name of the saint, except for a Catholic priest I met hitch-hiking in Connecticut. For that matter, only some college-educated people around here pronounce the saint's name that way.;-) Carlstak (talk) 18:16, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One source claims it's pronounced og-əs-TEEN [2], but that seems unlikely... --Macrakis (talk) 20:59, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A distinction needs to be famous people who were born and/or died in St. Augustine, and people who only lived hear briefly at some point in their life. I mean, I'd hardly associate the famously Canadian Eugene Levy with the city. 2601:346:C201:60C0:B505:F7EE:C622:3AE (talk) 13:25, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're right; it's ridiculous. Carlstak (talk) 14:22, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've trimmed this excessive listing, and it's still quite long. Lists like this tend to attract people who want their favorite minor sports figure or persons with only a tangential connection to the city listed. Personally, I think they're a blight on WP articles and subject to abuse, much like "In popular culture" sections where people want to list every single instance of a subject mentioned in video games. This information might be better placed in a separate article. Carlstak (talk) 15:36, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

{{Copied | from = Cross and Sword | to = St. Augustine, Florida | diff = https://teknopedia.ac.id/w/index.php?title=St._Augustine,_Florida&diff=prev&oldid=1171015798}} Mgrē@sŏn (Talk) 14:39, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]