Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

Jump to content

Talk:Miami

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 10 hours ago by Schazjmd in topic Flags in the infobox (again)
Former good articleMiami was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 21, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
March 17, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
April 4, 2006Good article nomineeListed
March 4, 2008Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Slight formatting issue in Climate section

[edit]

The following sentence is formatted incorrectly: "Globally, it is one of the most at-risk cities, according to a 2020 report by Resources for the Future. Global sea level rise." should probably be changed to something like: "Globally, it is one of the most at-risk cities due to global sea level rise, according to a 2020 report by Resources for the Future." Aftramarket (talk) 20:39, 15 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

 Done The content and citations were duplicated there. I removed the duplicates, and rewrote the remaining content. Thank you for bringing this to our attention. Donald Albury 21:17, 15 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Flags in the infobox (again)

[edit]

Hi there User:glman...this flag-in-the-infobox of city articles battle has been going on too long. I'm wondering if a RfC would be beneficial? Previous discussions don't seem to have led to a consensus. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 14:14, 28 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

I honestly don't have a strong personal opinion, but I think it could be worth seeing if there's consensus to change from the current wording in the MOS. Certainly will attract more outside voices into the discussion. glman (talk) 15:12, 28 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
I think a lot of use of flags in infoboxes is decorative rather than informative (esp. examples such as a state flag in a city infobox...those tiny icons are not readily identifiable by most readers...I wouldn't even recognize my own state's flag in that tiny icon), but I've read through the archives of Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons and there are a number of editors who seem to prefer them (and, I suspect, think there should be more permitted).
I recently reverted an addition of state/country flag icons to a city infobox, relying on the part of MOS:INFOBOXFLAG that says Generally, flag icons should not be used in infoboxes, even when there is a "country", "nationality" or equivalent field: they could be unnecessarily distracting and might give undue prominence to one field among many. But then I read through further, to where it qualifies it with Human geographic articles – for example, settlements and administrative subdivisions – may have flags of the country and first-level administrative subdivision in infoboxes. So I undid my revert, because the MOS makes it an explicit option and I didn't want to argue over it when informative vs. decorative is so subjective.
I think an RfC would be heavily attended and contentious, and would probably result in a stalemate between those who think flags add value and those who don't. Schazjmd (talk) 21:54, 28 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Semi-protected edit request on 28 July 2026

[edit]

Change "many wealthy Cubans sought refuge in Miami" to "many Cubans sought refuge in Miami" DiegoCanarioFortaleza (talk) 15:38, 28 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

 Done -Ari 1600! 🇺🇲🇭🇳 15:55, 28 July 2026 (UTC)Reply