Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Florida/Archive 2

message: Ok any ideas on what we should have on this --Jaranda wat's sup 05:49, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: Category:Attractions in Florida is now open for business. - Aerobird 01:23, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Good! -- Dalbury(Talk) 01:37, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ideas

message: 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)
thread_title:  Voting on proposed templates 

message: 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.  you have  -- 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)
replies: text: Actually, on looking at your code, it would make no difference on server load. KillerChihuahua?!? 13:33, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, let's just forget about this and go back to the old way, then. --Tetraminoe 08:26, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Doesn't using {{subst:templatename reduce the server load? -- Dalbury(Talk) 14:09, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attempting a unified template 

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

text: After categories are done, all that'll be left is articles. Pages that use Template:Project Florida should be changed to use , 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)
thread_title:  Naming 

message: 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)
replies: text: Dear me... probably should. KillerChihuahua?!? 23:05, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: Looks OK to me. If no one objects, we could start using it tomorrow. -- Dalbury(Talk) 00:23, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

text: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: Just added myself to the category. Good idea.  How about a userbox for us? --Joe Sewell 03:32, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Second item in the Project Templates section:  -- Dalbury(Talk) 03:37, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks great! Thanks. --Joe Sewell 16:40, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Great! Can we redirect the page to :Category:Wikipedians in Florida now? --Tetraminoe 13:24, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is this a vote?  Approve, Yeah, Redirect, Consent and all that.  ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 13:44, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

text: 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)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Florida]] cleanup

message: Please sign below using # ~~~~ to endorse this view.
# Tetraminoe 03:20, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Other (edit this if you choose this)

message: 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)
thread_title:  Related WikiProjects 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: 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)
replies: text: 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)

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

message: 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)
replies: text: I prefer we keep the list here for now. KillerChihuahua?!? 13:15, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to separate page 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: Done -- Donald Albury (Dalbury)(Talk) 03:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: List of places in Florida

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: I added the stub Florida Territory here.  If that's bad, just remove it. :)  —Wknight94 (talk) 20:52, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical Articles 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Miami, Florida 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: Bartow, Florida 

message: I've just created .  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)
replies: text: And I've made . 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)
replies: text: Good idea.  I tended to avoid applying  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)

text: Also , populated from stubs in :Category:Florida media. --Tetraminoe 23:02, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

text: 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)
thread_title:  New stub 

message: 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)
replies: text: Hardly!  Added it to the requested articles, though, under Jones College (Jacksonville). ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 03:59, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They also have a campus in Miami. :) -- Dalbury(Talk) 04:10, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: Well, sure. I only have 83 articles ahead of it on my todo list. -- Dalbury(Talk) 10:15, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Er..that was kind of a joke? ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 13:29, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah. I should have used a smiley. :) -- Dalbury(Talk) 13:38, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Jones College

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Need your help 

message: 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)
replies: text: and welcome to the project! KillerChihuahua?!? 03:12, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  wiki florida 

message: 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)
thread_title:  [[Maritime History of Florida]] 

message: 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  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)
replies: text: *History of Miami has successfully gained Featured Article status on 2 February 2006.  ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 14:25, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Where? I don't see it... :-( - Aerobird 16:07, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  HERE:  Wikipedia:Featured_article#History  ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 16:39, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Should we nom it for the front page? Wikipedia talk:Tomorrow's featured article --Tetraminoe 18:41, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[History of Miami, Florida]] 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Added tasks 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: How about orange superimposed over outline of state, like on license plates. --Tetraminoe 06:47, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: No. The change will appear after the cache is cleared. -- Dalbury(Talk) 01:50, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Use of image of the Great Seal of the State of Florida

message: 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)
replies: text: No. The change will appear after the cache is cleared. -- Dalbury(Talk) 01:50, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Florida resident template

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: I have "emptied out" the :Category:Floridiana and nominated it for deletion here.  ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 23:10, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Florida culture vs. Floridiana 

message: 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:
* :Category:Census-designated places in Florida
* :Category:Cities in Florida
* :Category:Florida counties
* :Category:Incorporated areas in Florida
* :Category:Towns in Florida
* :Category:Unincorporated communities in Florida
* :Category:Villages in Florida
* these have no common grouping yet, but should (:Category:Metropolitan areas of Florida?) -- a naming convention wouldn't hurt, either:
** :Category:Pensacola Metro Area
** :Category:South Florida metropolitan area
** :Category:Tampa Bay Area
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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: Sounds right. The mishmash here in Pinellas is a fine example of what you describe. Mikereichold 14:13, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

text: 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)
replies: text:  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)
replies: text:  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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: Category:Census-designated places in Florida as subcat of :Category:Unincorporated communities in Florida is done. - Aerobird 18:37, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I added a note about the usage of CDP vs. unincorporated generally. --Tetraminoe 09:01, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

text: 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)
replies: text: Category:Municipalities in Florida sounds fine. -- Dalbury(Talk) 12:24, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

text: 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)
thread_title:  Categorizing: All these places 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Images in templates 

message: Since tagging Okefenokee Swamp with  on 15 Jan, the article has undergone serious improvement, some at the hands of WP:FLA members. See the improvement: . 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)
thread_title:  Kudos on Okefenokee Swamp article 

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

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

message: 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)
thread_title:  Johnathon Byrd