User talk:MiamiDolphins3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Hello, MiamiDolphins3, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  BD2412 T 23:50, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Good edits on U of M Strike section[edit]

Your adding "alledged" to both my edit and the one regarding the sprinklers were good calls. It's nice to have someone proofreading. Lawyer2b 23:20, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Edits on UM Strike[edit]

Please use discussion page to talk about editing. 23:33, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I moved this sentence here so we can discuss it:

"Despite the severity of the allegations, however, the vast majority of UM's custodial workers--an estimated 80 percent--have refused to honor the strike and have continued working."

First, who has done this estimation? Second, who is to decide that these workers have "refused to" honor the strike, as opposed to "are afraid to" honor the strike. Both claims strike me as POV. Third, was the percentage different before and after the wage increase? That seems relevant. 00:16, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Good question on the source of the estimation; at the very least it should be identified. I can see your point regarding the POV of either "refused to" or "are afraid to". I think a good compromise would be to simply say "are not striking and continue to work". I don't know about any percentage changes until I see the sources of the information. Lawyer2b 01:42, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

lawyer2b, I think your last edit took care of the problems. If anyone comes across information on the percentages of workers striking before vs. after the wage increases, please list it here. Also, if anyone comes across conflicting information on the number of workers striking, please note it as well. It may be clear now, but earlier on, the claims of UNICCO vs. SEIU were rather different. 12:51, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Source for percentage of striking workers[edit]

My source for the 75 percent of custodians continuing to work is the April 12, 2006 open letter from President Shalala. I have no reason to doubt the accuracy of that, but would be happy to look at other estimates if they arise elsewhere. I would suspect the university is in the best position to provide that data, however. MiamiDolphins3 02:45, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

What do you think of lawyer2b's point, on the article discussion page? S/he wrote: "1) While I think it's probably true the strike has had minimal impact on custodial services at the university, it's not common knowledge what percentage capacity a custodial workforce can lose before it significantly impacts its performance. Since Shalala's letter only mentions a statistic and doesn't say anything regarding its impact on custodial services, I don't think that inference should be mentioned without further support." I agree, so will remove that inference for the time being.

position of strike reference in main article[edit]

Dear MiamiDolphins3, I do feel that this should remain its own subsection for a while. After all, there are still many issues to be dealt with. If you think that the seventh-floor crew controversy, long over, deserves an entire subsection, then you can surely understand why I and many colleagues feel that the 2006 strike should continue to have its own subsection. Otherwise, it's hard to find unless you already know to look for it. Let's keep the visibility for the time being. (Keep in mind the workers' recent slogan: "We're not invisible.") Otherwise, I think you've been doing good work on many edits. Thanks! 12:40, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words. I agree with your point, and I think your revision on the page is a good one. Also, I did notice that there is some bizarre page format problem on the strike page today, and I'm working to get that fixed for us. MiamiDolphins3 17:09, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Recent edits: nice job! 01:25, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Image of the U Miami campus[edit]

Hi there, you put back the copyrighted image Image:UMiamiLakeOsceola.jpg in the article on the University of Miami. Per the image use policy that wasn't a great idea. Wikipedia aims to be the FREE encyclopedia, so free images are preferable over copyrighted material, and for that particular picture of campus a fair use claim is hard to make, even more so since there exists a free equivalent.

Yes, everyone will agree that the professional picture is "nicer" than the replacement Image:UofMiamiLakeOsceola.jpg. However Wikipedia is not a copyright violation repository. Dr Zak 11:48, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I was not the source for the photo you reference. Looks like it comes from some UM recruitment material, according to the original source documentation. I definitely agree with you that the old photo is vastly preferable to the new one that is in there now. Just want to make sure you are 100 percent sure that it needs to come down for copyright purposes, and I've left you a question about this on your userpage. In the meantime, I have left your new photo in place. But if the old one can be used, it should be. Thanks. MiamiDolphins3 01:33, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

User notice: 3rr[edit]

Regarding reversions[1] made on June 9 2006 (UTC) to Drew Rosenhaus[edit]

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. William M. Connolley 19:38, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

As a matter of explanation, I reported this 3rr violation originally, as a result of repeated insertions of an unverified and unencyclopedic paragraph inserted to the article. The disputed content was moved to the talk page, where, frankly, I think it should remain. MiamiDolphins3

UM strike article[edit]

Nice job with recent edits. Hopefully, this Derek Jeter fan will either give up or nominate it a third time, which could result in his/her suspension from editorship. Exhausting, really, making us spin our wheels like this. Thanks for keeping an eye on the page. Cheers, Universitytruth 16:07, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I'll second that - kudos! BD2412 T 16:42, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the kind words. I think it's an exceptionally well done article, and, obviously, a lot of us worked hard on it. It was a nice example of what wikipedia writing collaboration should be, and we should be proud of it. MiamiDolphins3 21:08, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Music article usage[edit]

Hello MD3. I've noticed that in several music articles you've put all the song titles in italics. This is incorrect. Song titles go in regular double quotes, album titles go in italics. Please see Wikipedia:Wikiproject Music#Albums, bands, and songs. Thank you. Wasted Time R 04:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

You are absolutely correct, and I've altered my practice on that. I also find a lot of albums and books not in italix, and I spend a chunk of time correcting those when I see them. Anyway, thanks for correcting me on that. MiamiDolphins3 21:09, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Sebastian the Ibis[edit]

Would you happen to have any photos of him that can be contributed for the article? All I have are photos that I can take off of my friends' facebook accounts, and I don't think that's very legal. Ryulong 21:36, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I did find a photo, however I got it directly off of the Hurricane sports website, so I don't know exactly how legal it may be. I should probably just wait until school, and try to take a picture of him if I find him on campus. Ryulong 23:48, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
I expanded the one on there now, and I think that makes it look a little better. It's such a beautiful campus it's too bad we don't have some additional photos. I continue to appreciate your good edits, by the way. MiamiDolphins3 21:10, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Miami University/University of Miami[edit]

I can live with that wording. Seems neutral. Sorry for the confusion.

The wording before your deletion was better. It restated a factually supported claim. Miami University alumni do note the age differential (as well as other unpleasant disparities) between the two Miamis. Your claim that noting MU's advocates is boosterism is true in the sense that MU's advocates are boosting their university, but that does not mean that including their comments is boosterism in the encyclopedia. Rkevins82 20:37, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. We need to incorporate MU's "boosterism", as that's an important part of the article. Please note that many Ohioans consider the whole "Miami (Ohio)" business to be POV, especially in instances where the University of Miami receives no such disclaiming tag (i.e. Miami (FL) ). This disclaimer appears to us to diminish the importance of Miami University, giving the Univ. of Miami credentials at Miami U.'s expense. -- SwissCelt 14:56, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
I am very comfortable with both articles at this point. Glad everything got straightened out. MiamiDolphins3 21:11, 28 September 2006 (UTC)


My apologies, MiamiDolphins3. I've been acting against the best interests of this encyclopedia. As I just noted in Talk:Miami University, I do actually have quite a bit of respect for the University of Miami. However, I don't let that detract from the equal respect I have for Miami University, and I don't want anyone else to disparage that wonderful institution in the hills of Southwestern Ohio, either. Can we call a truce here? Together, I think we can add quite a bit to both articles. -- SwissCelt 19:18, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey, no problem. I know this can sometimes be pretty aggravating. It was kind of you to offer an apology, and it probably isn't warranted. Keep up the good work and look forward to working with you. MiamiDolphins3 21:12, 28 September 2006 (UTC)


I blocked you and the 2 anons for breaking WP:3RR, more like 6rr in Jason Michaels for 24 hours. Jaranda wat's sup 23:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the 3rr does not apply to removing unattributed quotations that could be deemed as libelous or otherwise unsourced and inaccurate. Adding unattributed quotes to Michaels about a civil lawsuit that is still being litigated seems to clearly fall in this category, and I am right in removing them. MiamiDolphins3 04:44, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't see nothing libel though in those edits though. I'll unblock if you avoid the article for several days. Jaranda wat's sup 19:54, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Jaranda: The anonymous editor was inserting comments, atrributing them to Jason Michaels in relationship to a civil lawsuit against Michaels. The comments were unsourced and unverified. I politely asked the anon editor to reference them, which wasn't done. Seems to me they were potentially designed to influence the lawsuit, or perceptions of it, and were clearly requiring reference to even be considered for inclusion. Their removal was appropriate, I believe, and I was aware of the 3rr and felt their removal fell outside of the paramaters of this, based on the need to not leave unsourced and probably inaccurate comments about an ongoing lawsuit on the page. Anyway, that was my thinking. MiamiDolphins3 23:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Athletics alumni section[edit]

Somehow, I don't think alphabetization of team names is what should be used; it should probably be chronologically, but I don't know enough about them to make those changes myself. Ryūlóng 07:31, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm ok with the chronological listing. If you are looking for a pro affiliation, it's the easiest way to spot it. And, of course, the chronological and timeline info you reference is always available in the article itself. Anyway, that's my thought. Thanks for your note. MiamiDolphins3 21:06, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Stub templates[edit]

Please stop deleting the {{Amfootbio-stub}} and {{defensive-lineman-stub}} templates from the William Joseph (American football) article. The stubs attract editors to expand and complete the article. Continuing to remove the templates may be viewed as vandalism. Thanks.Chidom talk  19:44, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

AfD Nomination: Miami mafia[edit]

I've nominated the article Miami mafia for deletion under the Articles for deletion process. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Miami mafia satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. I have explained why in the nomination space (see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miami mafia. Don't forget to add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of each of your comments to sign them. You are free to edit the content of Miami mafia during the discussion, but please do not remove the "Articles for Deletion" template (the box at the top). Doing so will not end the discussion. -- No Guru 20:23, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Ray Lewis (NFL)[edit]

Hello. The infobox on this article is really messed up. Could you please fix it? Thanks. dposse 14:26, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

University of Miami[edit]

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing in University of Miami. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert a single page more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. -- No Guru 20:44, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

2006 Miami Hurricanes football team[edit]

I like the paragraphs you added in the opening. Would you mind if I moved it, though, to its own section titled "Analysis" or "Postscript" or something in that vein? That way at the end of the season, it could easily be converted into a kind of Epilogue on the season.-PassionoftheDamon 00:05, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, and, sure, move it wherever you think it's most appropriate. You've done a great job with that page. MiamiDolphins3 15:41, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Jerry Herman[edit]

Hello! I have reverted this entry to the one without the excessive number of sub-heads since its overall length doesn't warrant them. Sub-heads are useful if the info following them is lengthy, but in this case most were followed by only two or three sentences. Thanks for adding the Hollywood Walk of Fame fact. TOM 14:22, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Comment requested[edit]

Greetings, I wanted to invite you to leave a comment at Talk:Nova Southeastern University. Another user and I disagree on the use of a POV tag, and I think a third opinion could help us with this. Thanks for taking the time! Best, -Anthony Krupp 14:25, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Miami mafia[edit]

Hi there, the above article has been nominated for deletion discussion. Please follow the link in the blue tag at the top of the article to join in the discussion Bwithh 04:49, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Category:Iron Arrow Honor Society members[edit]

I have nominated Category:Iron Arrow Honor Society members, which you created, for deletion. The general consensus has been to avoid categorizing people by honor society membership. You may want to comment at WP:CFD. Dr. Submillimeter 08:29, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Reversion of University of Miami[edit]

If you have a specific problem with the changes I have made to the article, then say it, instead of reverting all of my changes and pretending that you know what you're doing. I restructured the article according to guidelines established by high-quality university articles and WikiProject Universities. The fact is, this article has little real content, and its current form reflects that. You do want to improve the article, don't you? Then listen to my advice.

  1. Per Wikipedia:WikiProject Universities#Structure, your lead is too short and you're entirely missing some important sections- Campus, Student life, etc. You will use those sections to describe a lot of things about UM, such as the layout of the campus, the surrounding area, the school traditions, etc.
  2. Per FA- and A-class universities, lists of alumni are usually not included in the main article; instead, a summary is written describing only the most notable alumni in prose. For examples, see Duke University#Alumni, Cornell University#Alumni, Georgia Institute of Technology#Alumni.
  3. Of the sections you do have, #History is entirely too short; you somehow manage to cover a bit under a century of UM history in one short paragraph. The newly consolidated #Profile is pretty good. The list of presidents needs to be converted to prose and added to #History.
  4. Consult the articles in Category:FA-Class Universities articles as you consider these changes.

Disavian (talk/contribs) 21:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Information.svg Please do not assume ownership of articles such as University of Miami. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 04:15, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Jeff Garlin[edit]

Jeff Garlin received heavy editing today by unregistered users and may benefit from a good review. If you have the time, would you please read over the article and make any necessary changes. Thanks. -- Jreferee (Talk) 07:50, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


Hi, I reverted your addition of NNDB links to various articles. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. However, even it is appropriate to add the link (I have seen it on other articles), we should not be mass-adding it to all these pages. If you think they have good information it is recommended that you add content to these articles as opposed to external links. I hope you understand what I'm saying, please let me know if you have any questions. Bash Kash (talk) 03:14, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I would not recommend adding NNBD links to articles. The website is not considered an RS nor an official link by WP:EL  StarScream1007  ►Talk  04:41, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Sean Taylor edit...[edit]

Sorry but there is an Miami (ohio) as well as an University of Miami so the edit that you made was not needed, so I have reverted it. Contact on my talk page if you want to discuss your edit. Happy Editing, HairyPerry 18:45, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

That reason makes it more, not less, important to distinguish it as the "University of," to avoid confusion with the lesser known Ohio university. MiamiDolphins3 (talk) 21:08, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Paul Adefarasin[edit]

Appreciative of the great work you guys are doing at Wikipedia.

As per the article I posted, I meant it not for promotion of a personality of sort and I know the article was speedily requested for deletion based on the reference to University of Miami.

It is already deleted now and I want you to re-consider helping out on what to remove and add. One thing is for sure, the personality focused is bringing up some worthwhile thing in Nigeria and Africa that is undaunting.


Dbeloved (talk) 01:38, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

"Living it up: the 9,000 square foot mansion"[edit]

The section you added (again) to the article on Donna Shalala was neither neutral nor an accurate summary of the source. Please review WP:NPOV and WP:BLP. Repeatedly adding false, negative material to the biography of a living person is a serious problem. Don't let it happen again. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 08:46, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

I see nothing inaccurate in it at all. It includes cited comments from the subject herself and is a summary of probably the largest biographical profile on this woman from arguably the world's most respected newspaper. So it would be helpful to be more specific in what is "false" or inaccuate. I personally do not see that. MiamiDolphins3 (talk) 11:27, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
The material was far from being neutral, and it used POV terms that weren't in the cited article, like "lavish", "mansion", and "boasted". It inaccurately reported that there was a Lenox collection, or that she had furniture from the estate of a newspaper publisher. And excessive weight was devoted to it, especially since it's already mentioned in the article. To give it as much space as her entire cabinet career is totally out of whack. And that section isn't alone. You've also been adding other non-neutral and poorly-sourced materials to that article for the past two years. Other editors have removed them repeatedly, commenting on the BLP violations, so you should have learned your lesson by now. If you can't stay neutral on the topic then don't edit it. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 11:56, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Let's take these one at a time. First, you can retract your comment about the accuracy, which you called not "accurate" and "false." The paragraph is completely accurate. Completely. And not even subject to interpretation. It comes from her own mouth in the nation's newspaper of record. What is inaccurate are your brazen, abrupt comments. Do you even read these sources before leaving such abrasive comments, or do you just not let the facts get in the way of your put downs? Here, from the New York Times, is the exact source:
Best recent purchase: A 1790 French country cabinet from the estate of the late Washington Post columnist Meg Greenfield. I always loved it and admired it, and it reminds me of Meg and the times I spent with her.
Worst recent purchase: My 29-foot motorboat. I bought it when I came down here because I have a dock, and I thought it would be fun. But I just don’t use it enough. If anyone wants it, it’s for sale. It seats 12.
Favorite Clinton memento: When his term was over, he gave each cabinet member a beautiful Lenox bowl with text that says, “Thanks for Making America a Place Called Hope.”
So I do expect you to retract and apologize for your accusation about the accuracy with as much urgency as you made it. And then I'll exlain why the paragraph is central to her biography. MiamiDolphins3 (talk) 19:31, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
If you want to have an extended discussion about this, then we should move it to the article talk page. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 20:42, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
A more extensive discussion may later be required since you do not apparently understand the subject, and you are wrong about the notability of the paragraph, which has been broadly acknowledged as hugely notable in major media. I am less concerned about that. Vastly more important, you were very quick to label me "wrong" and not "accurate." Nor were you too polite about it. Turns out that YOU were wrong and inaccurate in your allegations, and that warrants both a retraction of your inaccurate allegations and an apology right here--on the page where you first made them. I expect that, and, to quote you, "Don't let it happen again." MiamiDolphins3 (talk) 23:00, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Reread the article versus your summary. I have already pointed out the errors, which you seem to have a hard time seeing. I'm not the only editor who has removed this material for BLP reasons. Please don't insert it again. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 23:26, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
This is your allegation of what is false: It inaccurately reported that there was a Lenox collection, or that she had furniture from the estate of a newspaper publisher.
That is not false. Nothing is false, except your abrupt statement alleging that something was false. That is a serious allegation. You were wrong in that allegation, which is equally serious. Now admit your mistake. MiamiDolphins3 (talk) 23:48, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
One bowl is not a collection. A columnist is not a publisher. The source didn't mention a "mansion", or use words like "lavish" and "boast", which are clearly POV terms. The entire tone of your summary was accusatory and devoted excess space to trivialities. It was deleted repeatedly and you restored it repeatedly. That's why I came here to alert you to the problem so there won't be another repetition. Discussion of the material article itself is better conducted on the article talk page. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 00:04, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
You are very reckless in your accusations and apparently also in your reading skills:
  • Best recent purchase: A 1790 French country cabinet from the estate of the late Washington Post columnist Meg Greenfield. I always loved it and admired it, and it reminds me of Meg and the times I spent with her.
  • I collect tribal rugs, not Persian rugs, because they often used child labor to tie the tiny knots in Persian rugs. The china is part of a large collection of collectables.
  • 9,000 square feet is a mansion. The place is informally called a mansion, and it is referred to as a mansion in other news articles.
There is, quite simply, nothing false, and certainly no deliberate misrepresentation. You threw that allegation out very abruptly and seem to have difficulty acknowledging that you are just wrong. And even the allegations of "false" are just a constantly moving target for you, as you make one untrue allegation after another. You first said there were no reference to these things. There are. Now you say you mean something else, and those things are not true either. You need to show greater care, and you need to acknowledge your own mistakes, which you still have not done. You need to do that.
Finally, the appropriate thing for you to have done would have been to have raised your own thoughts on the discussion page, not singularly remove it. You seem to represent that my insertion of it is wrong. You acted more abruptly and with less knowledge of the accuracy and relevance of the paragraph. MiamiDolphins3 (talk) 01:35, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


NFL player navbox edits[edit]

Please do not change the format of the college field to simply the university link. All NFL player navboxes use the school's football team article as a link, if it exists. Please contact User:Chrisjnelson, User:Giants27, or User:Yankees10 if you have any questions. Pats1 T/C 15:36, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Racepacket[edit]

Your input here would be helpful.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:33, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

University of Miami and NFL player infoboxes[edit]

See here. Please stop changing "Miami (FL)" in the infoboxes to "University of Miami". Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:25, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Why? There is no school called Miami (FL). MiamiDolphins3 (talk) 01:28, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Yes, but it distinguishes the school from Miami of Ohio, which is called "Miami (OH)". Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:39, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
So nearly a year later you change it all again. Why? Pats1 T/C 00:54, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Don West, Jr. and others[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated articles are Don West, Jr., Don West, Jr.. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to the relevant discussion pages: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don West, Jr. (2nd nomination) for Don West, Jr., Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don West, Jr. (3rd nomination) for Don West, Jr.. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:18, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Your invited![edit]

Wikipedia:Meetup/Miami 3 is coming up in the near future, you are invited to participate. Thanks Secret account 17:42, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Jerome Brown's son[edit]

I can't find a source that says that this Dee Brown is Jerome's son. I don't think it would make sense that Jerome Brown had Dee when he was 13 years old. Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:46, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

This is his son (born 1982). Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
I'd think there'd be more citations, but the one from the Washington Nationals seems to support it. He would not have been 13 (born 1965), but young (about 18). MiamiDolphins3 (talk) 23:28, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
No, this Dee Brown was born in 1978 and Jerome would have been 13 years old. This Dee Brown (his son) was born in 1982, so Jerome would be 17. Please do not undo my edit until the issue is resolved here. Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:57, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Ok. This seems to be him (and might be helpful):
Looked into this. There is no Wikipedia article on him. He plays outfield for the Winnipeg Goldeyes. MiamiDolphins3 (talk) 17:15, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:51, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

We Ready for Wisconsin[edit]

Miami IS GOING TO BEAT WISCONSIN. I say that out of all the Orange & Green I bleed!!!! After watching some Sean Taylor highlight videos I am proud to say that I AM a Miami Hurricane now as a fan and in the future AS A PLAYER. I hope you feel the intensity I have right writing this right now. I dont know if you like the Gators or the Canes. Same for the Dolphins. I also bleed Aqua & Orange. I went to the Texans game. I wasnt happy but I was DAMN proud of being there and enjoy being a MIAMI DOLPHIN.

Go Dolphins & Hurricanes!!! Peace man. Stealthninja545 (talk) 06:35, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

We got our asses kicked. =(Stealthninja545 (talk) 09:09, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

GA reassessment of Bruce Hornsby[edit]

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns which you can see at Talk:Bruce Hornsby/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:16, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Miami baseball[edit]

You do not need to add to the lead of every college baseball player from Miami that they played there. See WP:UNDUE. — KV5Talk • 18:43, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Sentence fragments (including in image captions) do not end with periods. — KV5Talk • 19:30, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I've fixed that in those places--and others. MiamiDolphins3 (talk) 02:00, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Username concern[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username (MiamiDolphins3) may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because it uses the name or URL of a company, group or product. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may file for a change of username, or you may simply create a new account and use that for editing. Thank you. --Funandtrvl (talk) 18:53, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Not really a username issue. Should I be blocked, too? Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:24, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
I created it before that policy existed, and I do not edit the Miami Dolphins page, so there is no conflict. MiamiDolphins3 (talk) 00:05, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Okay, thanks, didn't realize that Sports teams are widely used by fans as user names. Sorry! --Funandtrvl (talk) 01:11, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

WP:UAA discussion confirmed username was not a problem. category of reported usernames removed.--Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:38, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited List of University of Miami alumni, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Texas Rangers (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:24, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

College football team links in infoboxes for NFL players[edit]

Greetings, MD3. I have just reverted several of your recent edits to the infoboxes for several former Miami Hurricanes football players. Per the consensus of WP:NFL and the standard formatting for Infobox NFL player, we uniformly link to the player's college football team, not his university, in the infobox. Please feel free to link (once) to the player's university and college football team in the lead or main body text of the article. Thanks for understanding. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 23:11, 3 February 2013 (UTC)