Talk:Miami

Pie Chart

The pie chart of religious demographics makes no sense 88.104.15.4 (talk) 19:43, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

How so? Eyeballing the chart, it looks to me like the segments on the pie chart for each denomination match the percentages in the table. It is probablly too much detail to show in a pie chart, and some people may have trouble distinguishing the colors, but I am interested in why you say it makes no sense. Donald Albury 22:55, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Referencing errors in population history box

I've again repaired referencing errors in the population history box; the "Census" reference name has been inserted twice without being defined. I've also used the notation feature of the history box to clarify the exiting references. I don't think there's a reason to revert that change as it marks unreferenced values directly, and is therefore easier to verify. -- Mikeblas (talk) 23:49, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

picture

why is the first picture not even from the city of Miami? it's from Miami beach. it's a different city. ReignMan (talk) 10:37, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

speaking of that, the pictures in general on the article are terrible and out of date. using pictures from 2006 and 2014 leave out half of the current recognizable buildings. ReignMan (talk) 10:40, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

Are you referring the image of Ocean Drive? Basically, many editors do not clearly distinguish between the city of Miami and a broader area, often as broad as the Miami metropolitan area. That is in general true for most articles about cities, with confusion between what is in the city limits vs. what is in the postal delivery area with the same name, or some larger area. So, I agree that the image of Ocean Drive does not belong in this article. As for the age of images, the quality of an image and the degree to which it fairly represents the subject of the article are also important. We are all volunteers and someone has to volunteer to take new photos. We will probably keep the current skyline photo until the community feels that a more recent photo is an improvement on the current photo. Donald Albury 13:03, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

@Donald Albury I can probably get out and take better pictures, but my only real camera right now is my phone. ReignMan (talk) 09:56, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Your phone will probably take better photos than the point-and-shoot digital camera that I used more than 15 years ago to take photos that are still used in WP. Fair warning: some editors take the choice of images used in articles very seriously, so don't be surprised if someone objects to changes you make in images used in an article. Disagreements on images in articles should be discussed on the talk page. Donald Albury 12:44, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

@Donald Albury true, some of my old point and shoot photos from the early 2000s are still in use on some of the South Florida pages. They are not the greatest quality. ReignMan (talk) 16:07, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Changed the lead image

Hi all!

I changed the lead image for this article from the previous zoomed out panorama to a more focused and higher image quality skyline picture. This picture also features the signature pink skies Miami is known for (Pink is Miami's color). As such I felt it would be much better as a representation of the skyline, whilst depicting the city's character. Any suggestions are welcome.

Thank you. Becausewhynothuh? (talk) 07:56, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

I do like the photo you added, but I find that panorama highly valuable as an overview of the city. I wonder if one of the other photos could be swapped for it. Maybe the Vizcaya Museum and Gardens image? It doesn't seem so vital to Miami that removing it would be unwise to remove it. Cerebral726 (talk) 12:50, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Hmm. Can't say I disagree, since I did find the panorama valuable as well, but thought that it was too unclear and blurry to mean much. I've made an edit that considered your suggestion. Is that better? Becausewhynothuh? (talk) 13:23, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

I like the inclusion of the pink image. I believe the panorama should remain the header as the best overview of the city, as is almost always my criteria. Cerebral726 (talk) 13:39, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Great! my initial edit (before the subsequent 'how about this?' edit) seems to have satisfied the criteria for you. Thanks for workshopping this. Becausewhynothuh? (talk) 13:41, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

I have reverted the infobox image back to the original image of the gardens due to the fact that the pink image is just another shot of downtown (which is already showcased by the panorama). It is also not very illustrative, with the sunset being distracting and not showcasing much besides a small sliver of downtown. (MOS:IRELEV) It feels more fitting on someone's Instagram page rather than as image on Wikipedia and shouldn't have been replaced an high quality image of a landmark. —JJB^ers 09:38, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

@Cerebral726: Pinging since the now blocked user has continued to revert edits with sock accounts. I feel as if the "consensus" above was a compromise between you and a now blocked editor warring with you on multiple pages, without taking in account for the quality of the actual page itself and disagree with the inclusion of the image. —JJB^ers 02:51, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

I am fine with the decision you made. It looks good now. Cerebral726 (talk) 13:09, 1 September 2023 (UTC)