Talk:Miami-Dade County, Florida
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Miami-Dade County, Florida article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 182 days  |
 | Miami-Dade County, Florida was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
| Current status: Former good article nominee | |||||||||||||
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Requested move 30 June 2018
edit | This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Moved. I see no reason why an emdash would be appropriate for this kind of title; those are for specifying ranges, while hyphens are for conjoining two nouns together. ToThAc (talk) 01:28, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Miami–Dade County, Florida → Miami-Dade County, Florida – Earlier bold move appears to be controversial, see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_June_22#Category:Miami-Dade_County,_Florida. This is a procedural nomination, I have no opinion about the matter myself. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:08, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
- Support. I can see no reason for an em-dash in this title, as the name does not reflect a range. bd2412 T 15:48, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Generated metric conversion error in "Area" table for Wlevation
editThe Area table has an obvious error for conversion for feet to meters at Highest elevation Source provides elevation of 35(+5) but meters listed incorrectly as 22. No idea what "+5" means in this context here or at source doc. 35 ft per source ×12 inches/ft ÷39.37inches/meter = 10.67 or 11m rounded. Max is 40' and 40×12 inches/ft ÷39.37inches/meter = 12, so conversion should read 11(+1)m, or 11-12m, or perhaps elim. the unsupported/undefined +5 and just say 35 ft /11m? Not sure how to correct, nor how to check to see if this error is pervasive in other calcs. ChgoJohn (talk) 18:25, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
- The elevation data in the infobox is cited to peakbagger.com, which gives the highest elevation as "35+ feet, 11+ meters". A recent discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 362#Is Peakbagger.com a reliable source? raised some issues about the reliability of peakbagger, although comments were slightly in favor of accepting it as reliable. In any case, I recommend just using "35" in the convert template, leave off the plus sign and everything following it. I suspect the convert template will then work correctly. - Donald Albury 20:03, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
sounds great, Donald Albury! I agree. ChgoJohn (talk) 17:59, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
Donald Albury, Yes, elimination of range was needed to correct calc'd metric conversion. Thx. ChgoJohn (talk) 18:20, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
- I had forgotten that there are ways of showing a range using "|to|", "|-|", and "|and|", see the top section of Template:Convert. - Donald Albury 20:58, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
Requested move 23 January 2023
edit- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jerium (talk) 14:18, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Miami-Dade County, Florida → Miami-Dade County – There is no other county in the world with the same name. This constitutes as a case where no disambiguation is needed, Florida is not needed in the article title. JE98 (talk) 13:30, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose move per WP:USPLACE. Miami itself is on the AP Stylebook list, but that shouldn't extend to the county. O.N.R. (talk) 15:16, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose per the reasons given by Old Naval Rooftops. Every other county in the U.S. uses the same format. There is value in consistency. - Donald Albury 15:53, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose per the reasons given by ONR, as stated above. -- Alexf(talk) 16:58, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose I understand the reasoning, but please read about how Wikipedia follows what is known as the "comma convention" per WP:PLACE (specifically WP:USPLACE) and AP Stylebook. – The Grid (talk) 14:55, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Third Party Presidential Election Results
editPresidential election results table shows a combined third party vote winning the county in 1924. While this is true, these are multiple combined candidates and the official plurality winner of the county in that election was the Democrat. I believe it should be recolored blue with the Third party text still bolded and a footnote added to state in so many words that while third parties won more votes than either major party candidate, this is an agglomeration and that a third party candidate did not win the vote. Rtucci (talk) 06:46, 20 March 2023 (UTC)