Talk:Country club

Article neutrality

I agree with this article, but surely we can come up with something more neutral. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 17:50, 2004 Aug 10 (UTC)

It looks like about half of this article is spent discussing the "exclusiveness" of country clubs. While exclusiveness is characteristic of country clubs, is it really worthy of being half the article? Furthermore, there are several grammar issues in those sections. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.151.13.60 (talk) 18:00, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? Not sure what you mean

Which part of it do you have POV problems with? If you agree with it, cool. If you feel it is not neutral, fine too, but you have to give us something to go on as far as why you marked it.

We can't read your mind... ;) and the problem is not necessarily obvious.

- John Sherwood

Maybe he means the last paragraph, where it talks about businessmen trying to conceal their conversations and lying and cheating behind the gilded iron gates of a country club? You gotta admit, it smacks of an "I hate corporations" opinion. You present some of that part as fact and it should be presented as more like popular opinion or the opinion of some. If it is alright with everyone who cares about this article, I'd like to edit it and make it sound more neutral (while preserving the content). It would also be nice to add a list of famous country clubs. --flyhighplato 19:10, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I snipped out the last couple of sentences. If anyone would care to rewrite them, I've posted them below. --CVaneg 07:45, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The exclusion allows corporate dialogue and behavior to be concealed from the public and gives businessmen an environment where they need not fear retrobution for offensive behavior. Indeed, if popular culture is to be believed, most business golfers either cheat at golf, if they are poor golfers, or play under their ability, if they are good, since it is considered most advantageous to lose to one's superior, but within fewer than 6 strokes.

Article needs improvment

The first sentence is a good definition of what a country club is, the entire rest of the article reads like "Why I don't like country clubs". Some of the sentences are worthwhile and factual, such as "In the early 20th century..." and the Augusta section. These sections belong in an article which also addresses the positive aspects of country clubs.

The two sentences "Critics of exclusive country clubs argue that the high membership fees are a means to exclude "undesirables." In support of this claim, critics point out that club membership and maintenance fees can significantly exceed the upkeep costs necessary to maintain a country club's facilities." are blatantly non NPOV to me. At least I would need support of these 'critics' who point out the excessive fees, this claim is highly dubious. I know quite a bit about the financials of country clubs, and in general the claim is simply false. It is true that many clubs are very expensive to join, but the money that clubs take in is used to create a luxurious environment for the members of the club to enjoy. BillWallace 23:30, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I went ahead and edited the article, mostly to add a brief section about the benefits of joining a club. I left most of the social issue stuff, but I deleted the most unsupported and non-neutral sections. BillWallace 00:37, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grammer concern

Hey there,

I'm not sure if the grammer is correct here:

"In the United Kingdom, most exclusive golf clubs are simply golf clubs, and play a smaller role in their communities than American country clubs; gentlemen's clubs in Britain fill many roles of the country club in the United States. "

Should the first sentence read insted "In the United Kingdom, most exclusive *country* clubs are simply golf clubs..."

If there are no objections, I'm more than happy to make the update. -Stone

I agree... I worked in an "exclusive golf club" in Surrey, and it also boasted squash courts, tennis courts, swimming pool, fishing etc. etc. not to mention various other activities that were one-offs and occasional things. So, despite being known as merely a golf club, it was very much what could be considered a "country club" in that sense of the word.

Removed sentence "This led to the formation of country clubs that catered specifically to Jews,Catholics or African Americans who could not gain membership at other clubs. ". This needs citation of an example. BillWallace 17:05, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"The term is mainly used in..."

The term is mainly used in the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, and other former British colonies and dominions."

That is, wherever English is the primary language. I bet this can be said of a lot of English words. Sentence deleted! Simões (^talk/_contribs) 03:31, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Links to specific country clubs

Sometimes people add links to specific country clubs in an "External Links" section. I deleted the remaining ones as none of them were mentioned in the article. If you feel that a specific country club is particularly important in relation to this article, please drop a note in this discussion page. Thanks! JeremyStein 15:25, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

Merge golf club (institution) in to this article. The stub was created just because a lot of people (50?) created links to golf club when no such article existed, whereas the link should have been made to this article. 199.125.109.58 (talk) 06:04, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- A golf club is not the same as a country club, A country club is a private club which offers a variety of recreational sports facilities; a golf club only offers golf. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 17:57, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As discussed in this article, some country clubs are organized either as golf clubs or as tennis clubs. The second sentence says "Two of the most common types of facilities are tennis and golf clubs". There is no separate article on either golf clubs or tennis clubs. 199.125.109.58 (talk) 20:56, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I probably first read that as meaning One of the most common type of facility is a tennis and golf club, but that isn't what it says or means - what it means, and says, is that Two of the most common types of facilities are tennis clubs and golf clubs. 199.125.109.58 (talk) 21:04, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of course there should be an article on golf clubs! There are many famous golf clubs, worldwide, and not all of them fit the American country club model or wish to. Let the stub grow. Andrewa (talk) 02:06, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the best way to start it would be by adding a heading to the country club article. If it grows to longer than 5-6 paragraphs it can be split out as a separate article. Right now the country club article is 4,540 bytes and surely has room to cover golf clubs. 199.125.109.58 (talk) 03:29, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. It would be like saying let's not have an article on the clarinet as there's room to deal with it under woodwind. Golf clubs have an identity all their own, just as the sport has its own identity. Andrewa (talk) 10:35, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should be renamed, "Criticism of Country Clubs"

The article's tone is blatantly hostile and denial of it is passive aggressive and disrespectful. The culture of these clubs isn't 1920's Northeast America, and business is virtually never discussed. Everything reads like a stereotype promoted by vulgar comedy films instead of how people actually act in the real world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.89.5.84 (talk) 22:24, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't country clubs a place where lots of business deals are negotiated?

I was under the impression that country clubs are a fairly neutral place to negotiate business deals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CE2E:2550:3DA9:7C1E:CED4:130F (talk) 13:38, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising

This article, which should explain a general notion, has been turned into an advertisement for one Indian company. Even the infobox is full of trash. These edits are definitely done in bad faith, so I suggest cleaning up the article and permabanning the "contributor(s)". --213.184.43.2 (talk) 17:18, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV/agenda pushing

I have to agree with several of the above comments. The article spends far too much space on unreflecting allegations of discrimination and a general condemnation of this. All in all, it sounds like a PC fanatic decided to make this article a pet project. (An increasing common problem that has a severe negative impact on Wikipedia and its strive for encyclopedic writing.)

The section on women is particularly problematic: The typical country club would not accept the husband and leave the wife out. In my impression, the wife is also more likely to drive for membership and the associated social status/bragging rights than the husband, who often is content to drive for a good golf score. :-) 80.226.24.6 (talk) 22:22, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link in the references

the link that is currently reference #7, http://www.pellresearch.com/Golf-Courses-and-Country-Clubs.htm, is a dead link. I don't know what the proper procedure is for handling links that have died. How do we give them a proper burial? CMW275 (talk) 21:52, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Country club. 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/20150708121913/http://breakfastpointcommunityassociation.org.au/ to http://breakfastpointcommunityassociation.org.au/

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) 20:45, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

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

Farmington Country Club Aerial View 1.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:23, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Restricted (jewish)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Restricted (jewish) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 4#Restricted (jewish) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 20:14, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Golf Club (establishment)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was to not merge. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 14:40, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Back in 2008, it was determined that Golf club (institution) should redirect here. In part, that seemed to be because the aforementioned article was a stub that could be easily merged into this article. Now, the article Golf Club (establishment) has been created, and I'm re-opening the merge discussion. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:42, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging Dinternational. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:51, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. I was not aware of the merge back in 2008. I created the page for Golf club (establishment) as not all golf clubs are country clubs. In fact, the country club term is mainly used in the US and UK, whereas its a very uncommon establishment in the majority of most European countries. For instance, I am from Denmark, and we have more than 100 golf clubs, and maybe 2-3 country clubs - which is why I thought there should be a designated page for each. But we can do the merge (again), if it makes more sense. Dinternational (talk) 19:21, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think it's worthwhile to have two separate pages? Are there enough differences between country clubs and golf clubs for them to be two distinct pages? Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 19:45, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merge - these seem to be sufficiently distinct topics to warrant separate coverage, particularly given that in many countries they are distinct. Klbrain (talk) 07:37, 16 June 2024 (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.