Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Florida/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

Ideas

Ok any ideas on what we should have on this --Jaranda wat's sup 05:49, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I recently started Category:Lighthouses in Florida and Category:Inlets in Florida. I've got some sources for the lighthouses (including PD pictures), but the inlets require more searching for usable information. Category:Florida state parks is poorly covered, and some of the existing articles are one-sentence stubs. There is no category for theme parks/amusement parks/tourist attractions in Florida, and a lot of the smaller or now defunct attractions have no article. -- Dalbury(Talk) 11:06, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
I'll see about working on a "Tourist Traps in Florida" (different name, of course ;-) ) category later this evening. - Aerobird 19:08, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Category:Attractions in Florida is now open for business. - Aerobird 01:23, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Good! -- Dalbury(Talk) 01:37, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Templates

Looks like we need templates for the following so far: Lighthouses, Ports. What variables are needed for Lighthouses? Date built, height I know. What else?

There is a pattern we can use to start the template at [1]. I would also add Lat. and Long. -- Dalbury(Talk) 13:11, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Ok, that uses the following variables:

  • Location:
  • Station Established:
  • Year Current Tower(s) First Lit:
  • Operational:
  • Automated:
  • Deactivated:
  • Foundation Materials:
  • Construction Materials:
  • Tower Shape:
  • Height:
  • Markings/Pattern:
  • Relationship to Other Structure:
  • Original Lens:
  • Characteristic:
  • Fog Signal:

Do we want all of those? KillerChihuahua?!? 13:15, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Only two of the stations on the Coast Guard list[2] have fog signals, so I suggest we dispense with that in the template. The "Relationship to Other Structure" has to do with whether the keeper's dwelling is attached to the light tower. I don't think that is an interesting item for lighthouses in Florida (the dwellings for screw-pile lighthouses are inside the tower framework, and I believe that all of the cylindrical towers in Floirda had unattached keepers' dwellings). Any exceptions can be handled in the narrative. -- Dalbury(Talk) 21:07, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
First draft for lighthouse infobox (very plain) is on my sandbox: User_talk:KillerChihuahua/Sandbox KillerChihuahua?!? 18:10, 21 December 2005 (UTC)


Did you happen to look at the lighthouse template draft in my sandbox? KillerChihuahua?!? 21:31, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I've created a test article in my user space with a dummied up infobox, using your template, but adding a location map as well. It's at User:Dalbury/Workspace/Cape Florida Lighthouse with Infobox. The lighthouse picture is unusually long, so this is a strong test of how the infobox will appear. -- Dalbury(Talk) 02:02, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm not so sure I like the map in the template. Love the lighthouse picture though. What's your vote on the template? Add more variables, re-order, move to Template space? KillerChihuahua?!? 02:09, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

The map does make the box long. The template variables seem fine over all. The fields 'Operational' and 'Deactivated (year)' are redundant, however. If a light has been deactived, then it isn't operational. I would say keep 'Deactivated'. -- Dalbury(Talk) 03:02, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Good point. Ditching "Operational." KillerChihuahua?!? 03:10, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

template now available: Template:Infobox_lighthouse
template now located at: Template:Infobox_lighthouse. --Dual Freq 06:28, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to do lots more Florida-specific templates. I really like Template:Infobox FLPorts for ports; I think FL templates for the other subjects discussed so far (i.e. forts and lighthouses) are just as appropriate.

Another subject, slightly trickier, would be state and national parks. The list of national parks in Florida is just about the right length for a template (11); on the other hand, the list of Florida state parks is far too long for a single template, but divided into Florida State Parks distrcts gives a manageable number (no region appears to have more than ~30 parks). In addition, or maybe alternatively, we could do templates by the type of park, e.g. state park, historic site, etc. ("State park" would be too long, but we could do templates for the other sites managed by the Park Service, like historic sites and archealogical sites.)

I'd also like to expand on the FL media templates that exist (e.g. Template:JacksonvilleTV).

And I think the template for FL state roads (Template:Flsr) leaves something to be deserved -- I think it'd be better to have a template that links to all other state roads (unless it's way too many to get in a template, but I'm not sure that's the case.

To get a better feel for what exists and what can be improved, I'll continue listing FL templates on the project page. I think I'll create a project template template (heh) so we can tag the templates themselves. -- Tetraminoe 13:15, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

We don't want to over-templatize. There is already a template for lighthouses, in the interests of consistency I made it non-FL-specific for use on all lighthouses.
We can do a navigation template for the parks, I would think - you're right, the list is too long for an infobox. There is overlap on Parks and Forts, IMHO we should move slowly and carefully in that area, and discuss thoroughly before precipitously making templates willy-nilly. KillerChihuahua?!? 13:21, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
I like the current lighthouse template, but I think there would be value in a navigation template for Florida lighthouses in addition to the general lighthouse template.
I agree there is overlap between parks and forts, and we don't want to end up with 5 templates on a page. We should keep talking out a solution here.
On the other hand, I think clearly a national parks in Florida template wouldn't be problematic, nor would addition templates in TV/radio markets (there is the question of overlap between markets, but we'd just used pre-defined markets e.g. Nielsen). -- Tetraminoe 13:27, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
I don't know that any other State uses a template like Flsr. Most seem to be using the Template:Infobox_road. See Georgia State Route 9 for how that is used. We could use both, but it would get spammy looking, especially on stubs.
Thoughts? Straw poll? KillerChihuahua?!? 13:30, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
I like {{Infobox road}}. I think it would be OK to use both. I agree it would look bad on stubs -- I think on most stubs, we probably won't have enough info to use the infobox, so we would only use the navigation template (at the bottom of the page, rather than on the right-hand side like FL ports). That seems OK to me.
I notice NY has a template at least for their parkways, if not all state roads -- see Belt Parkway. I think this would be good for Florida's toll roads / Turnpike system (is there a difference?). -- Tetraminoe 14:28, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Somehow I entirely forgot my first idea for more navigation templates: airports. I think a template just FL ports would be great for airports -- maybe excluding minor airfields (e.g. "international airports in Florida" or something like that). -- Tetraminoe 14:22, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Florida specific templates for Florida lighthouses is unworkable redundant clutter, as the lighthouses are already in the category. For a list for to-do (redlinks), there is already Lighthouses_in_the_United_States#Florida. The ports list is short enough to fit in an infobox, but lighthouses is not. A Nav template is only appropriate for certain subjects, such as television episodes and kings - Previous, Next, and in the case of TV, Season are obvious nav concepts. What on earth do you expect to add to lighthouses? It won't work as a navtemplate that I can see, and its too darn long for an infobox. Further, this is a solution looking for a problem - it does not address any need whatsoever. One puppy's opinion. KillerChihuahua?!? 15:25, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

To Tetraminoe, re: maybe excluding minor airfields. Since Florida has some of the largest and most notable minor airfields in the country (FTL Executive Airport and Opa-locka, to name a couple), you may wish to rethink that. And one of the smaller ones, Pompano Beach Airfield, is also the home to the Goodyear Blimp. ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 15:42, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Whatever we do with airports, let's pay attention to Wikipedia:WikiProject Airports. They make a distinction between airports with scheduled commercial service and those without. I've used their infobox for the airport articles I've worked on. -- Dalbury(Talk) 16:05, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Dalbury is absolutely correct. If a template exists, use that. If a project exists, don't conflict - I'm in favor of using the guidelines on the Ports project talk page for ports, even though that project seems inactive. Do not fragment WP, that is too close to WP:Point. Don't make unecessary templates per WP:TM. KillerChihuahua?!? 16:13, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

If nobody else is in favor of more navigational templates, that's OK. I just happen to like them: the navigational template at the bottom of U.S. Highway 1, for instance, may not be particularly useful, but it gives you an idea of what else exists in the same category, and an easy manner for browsing between them (better than browsing through a category). It makes Wikipedia feel more expansive. I don't know, I just like them. If we don't want to do more for Florida subjects, then we won't. I'll survive :)

And, a note about lighthouses: the entire list of lighthouses in Florida is too long for a navigational template, but having one template for operational lighthouses and possibly another for discontinued lighthouses would be manageable.

I think the easiest way to sort through this will be to list each proposed template and let people vote to make or not make each one -- which I will do below. -- Tetraminoe 01:00, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

There are 35 or so lighthouses in Florida, at least 30 of which are still operational, which is still too long for a nav template, unless you do one like {{Florida Keys}}. -- Dalbury(Talk) 01:42, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
I was wrong, more like 20 or so still operational (depending on what you count as a lighthouse). I hadn't realized so many of the Gulf coast lighthouses had been decommissioned. -- Dalbury(Talk) 13:19, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm going to re-read WP:TM, WP:HRT and so on to refresh my memory. KillerChihuahua?!? 01:10, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Voting on proposed templates

Vote to make or not make the following navigational templates for FL articles:

  • FL forts (possible overlap with other park categories -- needs discussion)
  • National parks in FL (11 items)
  • FL state parks, by region (1 template per region -- 5 regions, ~25-40 items per region)
  • FL state parks, by type (withdrawing proposal -- too complicated / esoteric)
  • FL TV stations by Nielsen market (~10 markets, most already have templates e.g. Template:JacksonvilleTV -- at least Gainesville does not, maybe 1 or 2 others)
  • FL state roads à la Template:US Highways ( >100 items) (withdrawing proposal -- these all exist, they were just unused and need work and standardization)
  • FL toll roads / Turnpike system à la Template:NYC Parkways (~20 items)
  • FL lighthouses, all (~40-45)
  • or FL lighthouses, operational (17 items according to Lighthouses_in_the_United_States#Florida) and FL lighthouses, retired (~25)
  • FL airports (38 items in Category:Airports in Florida -- not including airports w/o article)
  • or FL airports, w/ reg. commercial svc. and w/o (numbers unknown)

I should mention that I've created a mock-up for an operational lighthouses template: User:Tetraminoe/Lighthouses in Florida. It's not great, but it gives you an idea what one might look like -- and I think it's clearly manageable and useful. Feedback on the draft template (and votes / comments on the above) are welcomed. -- Tetraminoe 10:29, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Attempting a unified template

It seemed like it might be easier and reduce server load to combine the multiple project templates into one template with options. So instead of e.g. {{Project Florida category}} you have {{WikiProject Florida|category}} -- there is actually only template but you can have multiple versions depending on the option used. Unfortunately, I'm not that familiar with the inner workings of MediaWiki. I took a stab at it, expecting I could hack it together, but it didn't work. I think the problem is in the pipes (these guys: -> | <-) but I really don't know how to get it working. Maybe someone can help me out? Here's my draft: Template:WikiProject Florida. (I know a "draft" should go in a sandbox, but I thought it would work!) Any thoughts are appreciated. -- Tetraminoe

That doesn't reduce server load, it increases it. KillerChihuahua?!? 13:32, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
Actually, on looking at your code, it would make no difference on server load. KillerChihuahua?!? 13:33, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
OK, let's just forget about this and go back to the old way, then. --Tetraminoe 08:26, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Doesn't using {{subst:templatename reduce the server load? -- Dalbury(Talk) 14:09, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Naming

I think we should use WikiProject Florida instead of Project Florida, just to be clearer. I've renamed {{Project Florida member}} and {{Project Florida template}} in accordance with this. I've also renamed {{Project Florida}} but have not replaced the original with a re-direct, since there are many articles to re-tag. I haven't yet moved over {{Project Florida category}}, again because there's lots to re-tag. --Tetraminoe 08:29, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

I changed my mind and moved {{Project Florida category}}. I've started the process of re-tagging all the previously tagged categories, but I'm not done yet. (However, in the process I've also been tagging every Florida category with the new tag, adding descriptions for many categories, and cleaning up the categories a little.) Every top-level category is currently correctly tagged. To check for categories using the old tag, look here. Places I have not yet tagged are sub-categories to Category:Florida sports, Category:Universities and colleges in Florida, Category:Florida counties, Category:Transportation in Florida, Category:Geography of Florida, Category:Government of Florida, and Category:Transportation in Florida. (Some of the sub-categories are tagged, but not all.) --Tetraminoe 10:29, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
After categories are done, all that'll be left is articles. Pages that use Template:Project Florida should be changed to use {{WikiProject Florida}}, then the old template should be blanked and redirected to the new one. But that'll be a while. Still, it seems better to have clear names and be consistent. Clearer names and consistency contributes to the long-term sustainability of Wikipedia. --Tetraminoe 10:35, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Florida cleanup

Florida and California are the only U.S. states still marked as needing cleanup on this. Do we want to make it one of our projects? -- Dalbury(Talk) 23:02, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Dear me... probably should. KillerChihuahua?!? 23:05, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
I looked at it when I first started editing in earnest, and decided I was too new, and I wasn't sure how everyone would react to being converted by someone else, so I moved on. Unfortunately, it hasn't gone away since then. -- Dalbury(Talk) 23:17, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Suggested course of action: Remove each entry (don't convert) and notify editor on their talk page. We can decide on boilerplate text to paste in each entry. Once page is empty, our job is done. The editors can decide whether to add themselves to the category. KillerChihuahua?!? 23:24, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

First draft for notice:

==Change for Wikipedians from Florida==

The list Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Florida has been replaced by Category:Wikipedians in Florida. Your name has been removed from the list. If you would like to remain listed as a Wikipedian from Florida, please add [[Category:Wikipedians in Florida]] to your User page. thanks!

~~~~, a member of WikiProject Florida

Looks OK to me. If no one objects, we could start using it tomorrow. -- Dalbury(Talk) 00:23, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. Though maybe the sig could be more explicit: "a member of WikiProject Florida, a new project to improve articles about the state -- please join us and help!" -- Tetraminoe 00:42, 29 December 2005 (UTC)


Just remember to add the : inside the brackets for the Cat so it shows instead of adds, like this: [[:Category:Wikipedians in Florida]]. KillerChihuahua?!? 00:54, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Just added myself to the category. Good idea. How about a userbox for us? --Joe Sewell 03:32, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
Second item in the Project Templates section: {{User_WikiProject_Florida}} -- Dalbury(Talk) 03:37, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
Looks great! Thanks. --Joe Sewell 16:40, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Done! -- Dalbury(Talk) 11:21, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Great! Can we redirect the page to Category:Wikipedians in Florida now? --Tetraminoe 13:24, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Is this a vote? Approve, Yeah, Redirect, Consent and all that. ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 13:44, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
I guess so. I would have done it if I had thought of it at the time. I was more concerned about movign the link to the Yahoo group to a safe place. -- Dalbury(Talk) 14:21, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Florida now redirected to Category:Wikipedians in Florida -- Dalbury(Talk) 18:02, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Straw poll

Should we add the project template to all Florida related article talk pages?

Just the ones we work on, or that don't need work

Please sign below using # ~~~~ to endorse this view.

Add to all Florida related article talk pages

Please sign below using # ~~~~ to endorse this view. # ~~~~

Other (edit this if you choose this)

Please sign below using # ~~~~ to endorse this view.

  1. Tetraminoe 03:20, 29 December 2005 (UTC) Just the ones we work on. That said, we have undertaken a general cleanup and improvement of FL categories and templates, so it seems appropriate to tag all of them (even ones we didn't specifically work on). But only tag articles and images we work on as a project. (I just don't want to have to un-tag everything I did under the previous understand.) Thoughts?

Comments

Shouldn't that first option be "or that need work" and not "or that don't need work?" PRueda29 / Ptalk29 / Pcontribs29 01:16, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

No, the meaning is that if we fix it, or when we get to it, it doesn't need fixing, we add our template and move on. KillerChihuahua?!? 01:27, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Something from the WikiEN mailing list made me rethink this - Edited for format per Talk page style:

I saw one nomination that really annoyed me - List of Scientology centers - which prompted me to comment that nominators should have to bother notifying the relevant wikiproject.
This is a nice idea - and it's excellent if there's an obvious wikiproject, like regional ones. But we have such a plethora of wikiprojects that it's not immediately obvious if we have one for a specific topic, unless you already know about it...
Maybe if more WikiProject participants put an appropriate notice on the talk pages for their articles, it would be possible to tell easily.
But hey, we don't want to make more work for the AFD vultures: why should they bother looking at the talk page if they can simply nominate the article and leave it for others to attempt to defend it?

All of which addresses a reason for adding the WikiProject template to talk pages which I had not thought of previously. Unless there are objections, I am changing my position, and as no one else has weighed in on the "oppose" side, we can have it as settled to always add. KillerChihuahua?!? 13:14, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

I've been adding to the list of related WikiProjects. I'm attempted to list projects that relate to many (existing or future) Florida-specific articles. For instance, WikiProject Military history should be referenced when contributing articles about battles that took place in Florida. On the other hand, I've left out WikiProject Space missions, even though many space missions launched from Florida (and Florida is very identified with space exploration), because the articles will not be Florida-specific.

I'm kind of iffy about some of the projects I've included or left out.

I've been adding from the list of WikiProjects, which a.) is not 100% accurate and up-to-date, and b.) includes some, but not most inactive projects.

This is a long list, but a state is a complicated thing and relates to many subjects. It's up to us how high we want to set the standard for "related".

As a final note, as projects are born and die / become inactive, our set of related projects will need to adapt. It wouldn't hurt to poke around now and then and see what's new. -- Tetraminoe 03:47, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Seriously underdeveloped articles

One notable city that remains seriously underdeveloped is Hollywood, a city with somewhat of an interesting and illustrious history; and yet the article remains little more than census facts. ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 05:20, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

PRueda29's suggestions, plus those already on to-do list, plus Port Canaveral, alphabetized - cross off when done. Entries with a * after them are already on to-do list. I am re-suggesting we do an article a month on these. Everyone has ideas on what needs attention, if we don't collaborate on improvement, all we'll do is make lists. KillerChihuahua?!? 12:21, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Does anyone mind if the above posts are removed for page neatness (Bastique and PRueda29, I am asking you) along with my posts below hr, that would make for an editable list on talk. KillerChihuahua?!? 12:24, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree with starting up something like a collaboration of the week (or month), or something similar so we don't end up being all talk and no action. Also, Port Canaveral does exist, unless u had something else in mind with Canaveral, Port of. -- PRueda29 / Ptalk29 / Pcontribs29 12:28, 29 December 2005 (UTC) (and no, I wouldn't mind)

thanks and done - Port Canaveral exists because I created the stub last week. See Port of Singapore or Port of Los Angeles for how a world-class port article should look. Canaveral is the second largest cruise port in the world, it deserves more than a stub. KillerChihuahua?!? 12:32, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
I understand what you mean now, see, when I saw that Port Canaveral was a red link, I thought u didn't know it already existed and were suggesting it for creation. -- PRueda29 / Ptalk29 / Pcontribs29 12:52, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Seriously underdeveloped articles list

Move to separate page

This list looks like it might be around for a while and (I hope) be edited frequently as people add and remove articles. Plus, it's not really Talk so doesn't much belong here. Can we split this off à la Wikipedia:WikiProject Florida/Images wanted? Other WikiProjects often have several sub-pages like this.

I propose we create Wikipedia:WikiProject Florida/Articles and move this list there. I also propose we rename Images wanted to simply Wikipedia:WikiProject Florida/Images wanted. We can then use those pages both for articles/images missing entirely and articles/images to be improved. -- Tetraminoe 07:41, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

I prefer we keep the list here for now. KillerChihuahua?!? 13:15, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

List of places in Florida

This item is currently split into three parts:

  • [[List of places in Florida: A-H]] (160 kB long)
  • [[List of places in Florida: I-R]] (131 kB long)
  • [[List of places in Florida: S-Z]] (172 kB long)

How big of pieces do we wnat to break these into? -- Dalbury(Talk) 03:11, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

I've been breaking these pages into mainly individual letters, and some of them are still more than 38 kB long (see the list at Template:List of places in Florida). There was also an A-Z list tacked on to the end of the S-Z page. Most of those were/are dups, but some have to be moved into their correct place. I've done that up through D. I'll keep plugging at it, but it is sort of mind-numbing. -- Donald Albury (Dalbury)(Talk) 17:44, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Done -- Donald Albury (Dalbury)(Talk) 03:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Historical Articles

I would like to mention that we not neglect Historical Articles and would like to begin a separate list here. The reason I'm mentioning this is that I recently came across Seminole Wars, which is already an impressive article. It looks to be ready for Peer Review and is probably only a few steps away from being a candidate for featured article, that we can claim as a Florida Featured Article. ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 03:24, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

I've just done some work on Juan Ponce de León. One thing I'm trying to do is have different articles agree with each on things like the date of Ponce de León's landing in Florida. It really looks bad when an article says one thing, and you click on a link in the article and see contradictory information. -- Dalbury(Talk) 03:43, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
I added the stub Florida Territory here. If that's bad, just remove it. :) —Wknight94 (talk) 20:52, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

List of Historical and Biographical Articles

¤ - Indicates possible featured candidate

Miami, Florida

The closest article we have to featured status right now is Miami, Florida, it needs some slight cleanup and it really needs footnotes and references added. We could start working on it now. Any ideas? --Jaranda wat's sup 07:41, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Jacksonville, Florida is almost ready for a FA also needs footnotes and some cleanup, So lets clean that up also. --Jaranda wat's sup 07:45, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Bartow, Florida

A while back, I was inspired by Marshall, Texas being made into a feature article, and decided it would be a worthwhile task to try to make a smaller city in Florida a featured article. I chose Bartow since that was the small city I was most familiar with. IMHO, it is rather easy to make a large city such as Miami or Tampa into a featured article. But it does take a lot of research and hard work to turn a smaller city into a featured article. There are plenty of small cities in Florida with ust as colorful history as the larger ones. Bartow is just one example- Homestead, Sweetwater, St. Cloud, Kissimmee also come to mind.

Just a thought. For much of its history, Florida was defined not by its larger cities, but by the small towns which went up and down the state. Jcam 02:56, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

As with any featured article, I'm sure that a small city like Margate, Florida has an equal shot of being featured as a large city such as Fort Lauderdale, provided that enough interest and participation in the article is generated to improve it to featured status! ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 13:47, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

New stub

I've just created {{Florida-bio-stub}}. I am certain there are ample articles for which it to be attached. Feel free to use it prodigiously. ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 17:45, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

And I've made {{Florida-sports-stub}}. For sportspeople such as athletes, use that template instead of bio. Can also be used for teams, stadiums, etc. --Tetraminoe 13:44, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Good idea. I tended to avoid applying {{Florida-bio-stub}} to sports figures (who tend to get transferred and usurped by other states anyway) and who already had at least one stub, sometimes three or four! ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 13:50, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Also {{Florida-media-stub}}, populated from stubs in Category:Florida media. --Tetraminoe 23:02, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

If I may suggest it, a 'Florida location stub' might be needed; the 'Florida geography stub' seems a little "off" for theme parks, airports, and other non-'natural'(i.e. 'geographic') topics, and 'U.S. Structure' struck me as extremely strange applied to Lowry Park Zoo! (I changed that stub...) - Aerobird 01:14, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good. The only thing would be to check at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals to avoid getting hassled about creating a stub "out of process". -- Dalbury(Talk) 01:35, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Jones College

there is no article for Jones College in Florida. The existing [[Jones College]] article is for Mary Gibbs Jones College at Rice University. This will be a bit of a mess to fix up. -- Dalbury(Talk)' 01:01, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Hardly! Added it to the requested articles, though, under Jones College (Jacksonville). ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 03:59, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
They also have a campus in Miami. :) -- Dalbury(Talk) 04:10, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Okay, Dal... as you probably already know by now (but I feel I must tell everyone) I created a Jones College disambiguation page and moved Jones College to Jones College (Rice University) (after a foolish move to Jones College (Houston)), as other of Rice University colleges are done the same way. I've changed all links to the Florida college to Jones College (Jacksonville), which I'm sure that you will soon make into an article. ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 04:18, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, sure. I only have 83 articles ahead of it on my todo list. -- Dalbury(Talk) 10:15, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Er..that was kind of a joke? ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 13:29, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah. I should have used a smiley. :) -- Dalbury(Talk) 13:38, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Need your help

There's a vote at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Infobox City Florida Broward County. The reason I created the infobox was that the primary city infobox was not nearly adequate for the cities I was working on, I needed more flexibility and fields than the other box allowed. In fact, I created the infobox right before I knew about WikiProject Florida and would have in all probability created, instead, a Template:Infobox City Florida, which I still may simply do. Anyway...your vote of support at the VfD will allow me to do that.

Also, although I myself prefer the Metric system, it's still not in wide usage in Florida and I did not find it appropriate that km2 were the preferred units of measurement in our infoboxes. ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 03:57, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Update: I created Template:Infobox City Florida moved all the Broward Cities to there and requested speedy deletion of Template:Infobox City Florida Broward County. Someone got to it within 5 minutes! ℬ 14:43, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

wiki florida

Hi, I've been working on the Largo, Florida article. I'd like to join the Wikipedia Florida Project. Mikereichold 02:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Just add your name to the participant's list and you're in! No need for permission. -- PRueda29 / Ptalk29 / Pcontribs29 02:13, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

and welcome to the project! KillerChihuahua?!? 03:12, 7 January 2006 (UTC)


THANKS!

Maritime History of Florida

This is a new article, but it's impressive. If it's not a copy-vio, perhaps we can work on peer-review and put it up for featured status, what does everyone think? PRueda29 / Ptalk29 / Pcontribs29 23:32, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Excellent article, convince the user who created it into the project also and it has a good potential for a FA. History of Miami, Florida also has a good chance. --Jaranda wat's sup 00:47, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

History of Miami, Florida

There are a substantial number of pre-1936 pictures that could be useful for this article, both online and I'm sure available through the The Genealogical Society of Greater Miami, Inc. or any one of a number of these [3] organizations. I also know a few people that have lived here all their lives and likely have old photos.

Just don't forget Anita Bryant, orange juice and the 1970s, even though I'm sure many of us would like to! ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 14:23, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

The article is almost done, I'm close to nominating it for Featured article status. --Jaranda wat's sup 02:22, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Where? I don't see it... :-( - Aerobird 16:07, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
HERE: Wikipedia:Featured_article#History ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 16:39, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Should we nom it for the front page? Wikipedia talk:Tomorrow's featured article --Tetraminoe 18:41, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Article Improvement Drive

It's Unofficial. Until we can get enough participation to do something like this for real!

Added tasks

I took the liberty of adding a few items to the Todo page. Hopefully that was the right place - I wasn't clear on the difference between pending and open tasks. (I also left a question at Template talk:User Florida - but maybe that's not germane to this project.)

One of the issues I wanted to raise was how History of Florida and Florida Territory are supposed to fit together. The latter is still a stub but seems like a better place to put the 1822-1845 time period of the former. I was going to add some details but wasn't sure where.

Thanks and I look forward to participating in the project!  :) —Wknight94 (talk) 02:21, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

You raise a good point on the templates - my suggestion is to currently just use User_WikiProject_Florida. Most accurate. We probably need to sort out the User Florida and User FL res template verbiage. Florida should say FROM and res should say IN, that's the logical edit. One puppy's opinion. Very few people use either, btw. KillerChihuahua?!? 16:28, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Use of image of the Great Seal of the State of Florida

Well, the great userbox battle has reached out and touched our project. Someone removed the State Seal image from our userbox template on the basis that 'fair use' images are not allowed in userboxes. I just took a quick look on the Internet and found this:

Chapter 15.03 of the Florida Statutes in addition to specifying elements of the Great Seal, provides that the Department of State shall be the custodian of it, and that the Department of State alone has the authority to approve its use or display.

-- Dalbury(Talk) 03:08, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

We need a new image, then. Flag, or outline of state? Or does anyone have a better idea? an orange, or something? KillerChihuahua?!? 03:20, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
How about orange superimposed over outline of state, like on license plates[4]. --Tetraminoe 06:47, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
I like it.I'll see what I can do today, unless someone beats me to it. :) -- Dalbury(Talk) 12:10, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
I've put a put an outline of Florida filled with green as the image in the userbox. I haven't found a suitable orange to overlay on it. -- Dalbury(Talk) 16:50, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Florida resident template

hi, My florida resident user box still has the seal of the state of florida. Is this a problem? Thanks, Mikereichold 00:49, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

No. The change will appear after the cache is cleared. -- Dalbury(Talk) 01:50, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Archive this page?

Anyone else think it's time to refactor or archive parts of this page? --Tetraminoe 00:32, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I was just thinking the SAME thing. But feel free to be bold! My suggestion. Archive every subheading item that has no update after two weeks and move items as they age. ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 04:38, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Sounds like a plan. -- Dalbury(Talk) 12:33, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
I've started to do this, cautiously. The whole value in a WikiProject is the centralized discussion and establishment of precedents, so I want to make sure every archive has a one-line summary to make it easy to find out what's been proposed / discussed / decided previously. Help is appreciated.
In addition, I'm not sure what to do about short (one or two comments) subheadings, especially if they're just announcements or requests. Thoughts? --Tetraminoe 09:35, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Florida culture vs. Floridiana

Can someone clarify the usage of Category:Florida culture vs. Category:Floridiana? I can't figure out the rationale of categorizing an article in one category vs. the other (or both). So: are the categories equivalent? If yes, let's delete one. If no, let's lay out guidelines for using one vs. the other. (P.S. Any other concerns aside, it might be good to have an article on Floridiana.) --Tetraminoe 10:11, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

My understanding of the -ana suffix is that it denotes a collection, so Floridiana would a collection of things about Florida. I think that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information might apply. Surely we can find a more specific category for anything that might go in Category:Floridiana. -- Dalbury(Talk) 12:40, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Maybe I haven't lived in Florida long enough but "Floridiana" sounds like a ridiculous word to me. I'm from New York and I've also never heard New Yorkana or New Englandana or New Englandiana... (How about Massachusettsiana?! Or Pennsylvaniaiana?!!) I'd vote for keeping it simple and calling it Florida miscellany - or just leave it in Florida if it can't be categorized any better. As far as culture, the heading/description of the Floridiana category says Florida culture --- so leave it in the Florida culture category. Those are my opinions.  :) —Wknight94 (talk) 20:15, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
I have "emptied out" the Category:Floridiana and nominated it for deletion here. ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 23:10, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
I created the category some time ago, but I don't have any strong feelings about it. Do what ye will.--Cuchullain 23:33, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Categorizing: All these places

There are a lot of sub-categories to Category:Florida—too many, in fact. Here are a couple that ought to come together under some common grouping:

Thoughts? My first guess is to look to Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states, but that seems to be only about the actual state article and not organizing other articles about the state. New York has Category:Places in New York (underneath Category:Geography of New York and Category:New York); Texas puts them directly under Category:Geography of Texas and Category:Texas; states with less information on Wikipedia just stick it under the main state category. (But that doesn't work for us, with our 8 categories.)

Category:Places in Florida doesn't seem too bad, except it's not specific enough; we're talking about cities and towns and villages, not landmarks or forts (which are also "places"). I suppose we could toss it all solely under Category:Geography of Florida, but then that cat would have a lot of subcats. I think this bunch of villages and cities and stuff is a distinct enough grouping to warrant its own category, but what to call it? --Tetraminoe 08:15, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

The distinction of cities, towns and villages is meaningless in Florida. A municipality can call itself any of those, and we have villages of 25,000 poplation and cities of less than 2,000. There is no difference in municipal organization or powers. I think Category:Cities in Florida, Category:Towns in Florida and Category:Villages in Florida should all be merged into Category:Incorporated areas in Florida, and that Category:Incorporated areas in Florida, Category:Census-designated places in Florida and possibly Category:Unincorporated communities in Florida should be under a Category:Populated places in Florida. Category:Unincorporated communities in Florida may need a name change to indicate that it is for places that do not have a census designation, and therefore do not have demographic data available. We also should have a category in which to place former (abandoned) communities (Category:Ghost towns in Florida is too narrow). -- Dalbury(Talk) 12:57, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Sounds right. The mishmash here in Pinellas is a fine example of what you describe. Mikereichold 14:13, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
I would suggest perhaps combining all "unincorporated places" under a single category (quite a few of my UIncP stubs are probably CDPs, BTW)... - Aerobird 20:49, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
I think Category:Census-designated places in Florida is useful, and I'm uncomfortable with combining CDPs in a category with other places for which we have no demographic data. We obviously need to keep discussing this. -- Dalbury(Talk) 12:24, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
What about Category:Census-designated places in Florida as a sub-category of Category:Unincorporated communities in Florida? --Tetraminoe 06:39, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
That will work. We may want other sub-cats of Category:Unincorporated communities in Florida as well, such as Category:Ghost towns in Florida. -- Dalbury(Talk) 12:58, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Category:Census-designated places in Florida as subcat of Category:Unincorporated communities in Florida is done. - Aerobird 18:37, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
I added a note about the usage of CDP vs. unincorporated generally. --Tetraminoe 09:01, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
How about Category:Municipalities in Florida? Category:Incorporated areas in Florida is not terribly clear. Category:Cities in Florida would probably do fine, too, although it would be technically incorrect for municipalities that choose to call themselves towns or villages. --Tetraminoe 09:39, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Category:Municipalities in Florida sounds fine. -- Dalbury(Talk) 12:24, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and created Category:Metropolitan areas of Florida, moving the appropriate categories there. With that said, I think it would be wise to define metropolitan area for our puposes, and set some guideline on when to use a metro area category rather than a city category. (For that matter, we need a guideline on using a city vs. county category.) But anyway, I've moved the 3 metro area categories out of Category:Florida. --Tetraminoe 09:00, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Images in templates

It seems that developer User:Jamesday has requested that images be used only for content, and not for decoration, because of the load images place on the servers. See Wikipedia talk:Proposed policy on userboxes#Don't use images. So the question will probably be, "Do we really need images in the templates for this project?" -- Dalbury(Talk) 14:18, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

This will be an interesting discussion. I think we shouldn't jump to conclusions -- this'll be a policy that takes some time to form. The heart of the concern seems to be images that don't add anything to the encyclopedia. So an image in an infobox, IMHO, should be perfectly OK. Images in templates intended only for user or talk pages -- maybe not so much. --Tetraminoe 09:46, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Kudos on Okefenokee Swamp article

Since tagging Okefenokee Swamp with {{Florida-geo-stub}} on 15 Jan, the article has undergone serious improvement, some at the hands of WP:FLA members. See the improvement: [5]. Thanks to everyone who's worked on it. (If you ask me, this seems like a good target for featured article.) --Tetraminoe 09:13, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Florida organizations

I'm trying to populate Category:Florida organizations and I can't decide what to do: should this be any organization headquartered/based in Florida, or Florida-specific organizations? I added Brothers to the Rescue but then second-guessed myself, since depsite its base in Miami, it isn't Florida-centric. Thoughts? --Tetraminoe 10:03, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I would say "Organisations headquartered in Florida" would be the most logical criterion. - Aerobird 18:55, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Florida/SVGs to make

Added this item to opentask. I'll be taking a lot of these on myself, but please feel free to add your own requests. There are NUMEROUS items that would be better served as SVGs, as well as many City Seals/Flags that don't presently exist. ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 13:59, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Are we OK legally to add city seals and flags, etc.? I'm pretty sure national flags, etc. are considered public domain worldwide. But the works of cities, states, etc. are still subject to copyright. Can you point to guidelines / discussion on Wikipedia? --Tetraminoe 21:20, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
I personally have trouble understanding how any government work, paid for using taxpayer dollars, can be copyrighted...but maybe I'm just weird. - Aerobird 16:25, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh, but it is. 17 USC § 105: "Copyright protection ... is not available for any work of the United States Government". But [6]: "...applies only to federal government works. State and local governments may and often do claim copyright in their publications. It is their prerogative to set policies that may allow, require, restrict or prohibit claim of copyright on some or all works produced by their government units." Wouldn't it be nice if Florida law mandated that all state and local government works belong in the public domain? But it doesn't. On the other hand, we're lucky that even our federal government works are public domain; cf. Crown copyright.
I don't doubt that most if not all local governments in Florida hold copyright. My only question is whether they can control reproduction of their city seal and flag, etc. --Tetraminoe 17:36, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Florida-school-stub

Just discovered this stub; added it to the stubs page. - Aerobird 02:21, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Johnathon Byrd

Hi. User:Gablesgirl created Johnathon Byrd today. Can someone please look at it and confirm or verify the guy's name and the two submitted "scandal" links? Thanks. --Perfecto 03:40, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Florida/Archive_2&oldid=1142515854"