User talk:Comayagua99: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 17:38, 27 August 2008

Welcome!

Hello, Comayagua99, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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 ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Cool Blue^{talk to me} 17:52, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:Fiustadium08.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Fiustadium.jpg. The copy called Image:Fiustadium.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 05:02, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:EL

Please read Wikipedia:External links. In particular, there are passages which state things along the line of

"Links should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links, or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links."
"Avoid links to... Sites that are only indirectly related to the article's subject: the link should be directly related to the subject of the article. A general site that has information about a variety of subjects should usually not be linked to from an article on a more specific subject. Similarly, a website on a specific subject should usually not be linked to an article about a general subject. If a section of a general website is devoted to the subject of the article, and meets the other criteria for linking, then that part of the site could be deep-linked."

For example, you don't need to link to the newspaper's website from Florida International University, but you should probably do so from its article (The Beacon). If you really think one of those links is that important, use it to cite something in the article. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 21:01, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Harold Crosby.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Harold Crosby.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:08, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:FIU_NHC.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:FIU_NHC.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:58, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:FIU seal.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:FIU seal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aksibot 02:50, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Florida Memory Project

Images from the Florida Memory project are not as a group suitably-licensed for use on Wikipedia. As the website's copyright disclaimer says, "Some of the images may be protected by copyright. The user must assume any and all responsibility for obtaining appropriate permission for use or assurance of adherence to copyright restriction." Before you upload any more images from there, you need to make sure that the particular image you are uploading has an appropriate copyright status. --Carnildo 01:12, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect of Roary

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Roary, by CultureDrone (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Roary is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Roary, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Roary itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 11:37, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Downtownmiami.gif listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Downtownmiami.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. 72.153.33.156 21:01, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What did you crop this image from? --NE2 00:04, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FIU GA

Excellent! I'll take a look at it right now. Tromboneguy0186 (talk) 04:02, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I left a note on Talk:Florida International University with pretty much the only thing I can see that remains to be done. There were a few exceedingly minor issues in the text, but I took care of them myself. I find that can sometimes be more helpful than a nagging list of things to fix; by all means look over what I've added. Tromboneguy0186 (talk) 04:40, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have passed the article by the GA criteria. Congratulations. Tromboneguy0186 (talk) 05:05, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Unah.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Unah.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:24, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Unah.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Unah.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 20:18, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of museums in the United States

I'm sorry that I called your edit pointless. That was unnecessary for me to say.

Fort Lauderdale is a different city than Miami, so they should not be in the same section. A similar situation has arisen at least a couple other places on this page. Look at Minneapolis & Saint Paul in Minnesota. If there are an adequate number of museums from both "twin" cities, then we have combined them into one section like that.

The problem here is that in order for a city to have its own section, it must have 5 or more museums (See the rules on the talk page.). Fort Lauderdale does not have 5 or more entries on this page so we can't give it separate recognition yet. It must remain in the "Elsewhere" section until there are 5 or more museums listed - then it may be moved into a conglomerate section like you're trying to do. You may research and add more museums from this city if you would like.

It has been an unsaid rule of thumb to always shorten the name of universities in this form:

(museum name) at (ABC)

Where ABC is the shortest version of the school's name. This is to reduce clutter on the page. I have added this to the general rules/guidelines on Talk:List of museums in the United States.

If you disagree with anything I have said, please post a comment on Talk:List of museums in the United States so several of us can work together and come to a civil solution and to avoid "name-calling". I am going to undo your edit again. Please discuss this with us and allow us to all come to a consensus before you do it again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben Boldt (talk • contribs) 15:06, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Wrgp.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Wrgp.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 19:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Unah.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Unah.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 20:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Miami, Florida

I reverted your changes to Miami 1) to eliminate the vandalism that was entered right before your edits and 2) because most of the companies you added are not headquartered in Miami. Try to limit your additions to Dade County, at most, since Fort Lauderdale and Broward County are a separate Metropolitan Division within the MSA. Horologium (talk) 20:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, and I apologize. I went through and removed the ones that were already there. Thank you for re-removing the vandalism when you reverted my change. Horologium (talk) 20:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Florida

I reverted your edit of the enrollment at Miami-Dade Community College, as it clearly was not supported by the source cited for that section. -- Donald Albury 00:42, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Panther rage.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Panther rage.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:55, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Miami metropolitan area

Please stop converting [[South Florida]] and [[South Florida metropolitan area]] to [[Miami metropolitan area]]. [[Miami metropolitan area]] is a redirect to [[South Florida metropolitan area]]. I find these changes to be disruptive. -- Donald Albury 13:07, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted your change in the [Florida]] article of the link to [[South Florida metropolitan area]] to [[Miami metropolitan area]]. Your changes are disruptive. Please stop making these disruptive edits. You may be subject to sanctions, including being blocked from editing, if you continue to disrupt Wikipedia. -- Donald Albury 20:11, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of List of shopping malls in the United States

An editor has nominated List of shopping malls in the United States, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. 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 "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 by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of shopping malls in the United States (3rd nomination) and 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. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 22:02, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with Emporis

Yeah, you probably noticed their erroneous information listed for Carbonell Condominium... I usually try to use SkyscraperPage for dates, but if that site too seems incorrect, do you think it would be better to simply leave some date entries blank? There is, after all, a note stating Table entries without text indicates that information regarding building height has not yet been released. This can be changed to include dates of completion as well. Cheers, Rai•me 01:26, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Confused as to where downtown ends / midtown begins

I figured I would ask you if you know of a source that tells where the division is between Downtown Miami and Midtown Miami. Or is there a transitional space in between - (Omni area)? The only thing I could find online about midtown is the development that's supposed to be built in the old railyard (only 55 acres) inside Miami / SE 2nd Avenues and 36th / 29th Streets. I live in the Grand (behind the Omni) and everyone tells me I live in downtown Miami. The Opera Tower is literally a hundred feet from my front door and my realtor at The Grand & Assocs. swears up and down that the Opera Tower, 1800 Club and Quantum are all downtown properties. I was told that midtown isn't until north of 20th St. I couldn't find anything at all on the web, aside from commercial realtor sites that don't really say anything. The city of Miami site doesn't claim a 'Midtown' in any of its neighborhoods either. --> here. It seems that the downtown/midtown distinction may be subjective. Do you know of any reliable source? - Marc Averette (talk) 20:09, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Coconut Grove

Comayagua99 - I see on 5/16/08 you added "Downtown", "Brickell", and "Midtown" to the "See Also" section in the Coconut Grove article. Can you tell me why you did this? I don't see much of a relationship between these places. Brickell is contiguous to the Grove - but Midtown ? If you added these why wouldn't you add Coral Gables or Hialeah ?GroveGuy (talk) 02:35, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Emporis/SSP

I definitely see what you mean about Emporis and SkyscraperPage often "getting their facts wrong"; it is an issue I have faced at several points :-) And in the case of The Ivy, it may very well be no longer under construction. However, in order for this to be stated in List of tallest buildings in Miami, there needs to be a verifiable and reliable reference stating that the building is no longer under construction, to "counter" the Emporis and SkyscraperPage refs. You may be interested in the long discussion at Talk:Burj Dubai regarding updating outdated information; the consensus there was that even if the building was obviously higher than the outdated official reports from Emaar stated it was, a reference from a reliable source was still needed before the information in the article could be altered. Cheers, Rai•me 00:16, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Meetup

Wikipedia:Meetup/Tampa -- You're invited! Hires an editor (talk) 13:31, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for Image:Brickell3.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Brickell3.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 22:10, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Brickell2.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Brickell2.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 22:11, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Brickell bay.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Brickell bay.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 22:11, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Brickell1.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Brickell1.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 22:12, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Brickellfinancialcentre.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Brickellfinancialcentre.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 22:12, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Miamitodaynews.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Miamitodaynews.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 22:13, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ransom-Everglades

Dear Comayagua99 - I can see by your edits you are interested in the geography of Dade County. Let me tell you a little history. Have a look at this map: [[1]] This shows our county at about the time the school was founded. Of the settlements designated then only three remain today: Hypoluxo, Miami, and Coconut Grove. The school was founded in 1893 as Pine Knot Camp. In 1895, one year before the city of Miami was incorporated, Coconut Grove had the only hotel between Palm Beach and Key West and the first swimming pool and tennis courts in the area; at this time there were about six people in the settlement called Miami. In 1919 the town of Coconut Grove was incorporated. In 1925, fearful that Coral Gables would outgrow it, Miami underhandedly engulfed Coconut Grove, Silver Bluff, and several other neighborhoods. Trivia: streets in the Grove are named the opposite to those in Miami; thus "Grand Avenue" and "Virginia Street". So, although Coconut Grove is legally a part of Miami, we Grovites fiercely defend our separate identity; continue to improve other Wiki areas but please leave Ransom Everglades alone. --GroveGuy (talk) 01:27, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comayagua99 - On my talk page you said that "Coconut Grove, Florida" does not exist. "Coconut Grove, Miami, Florida" however, does. You are WRONG. Go to the post office website: http://zip4.usps.com/zip4/welcome.jsp and look up Ransom-Everglades' address: "3575 Main Highway" city:"Coconut Grove" state:"FL". The US government will confirm that "Coconut Grove" exists. And they will confirm that "Coconut Grove, Miami" does NOT exist. --GroveGuy (talk) 23:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comayagua99 - This dispute with you is fun. Your citing the City of Miami's NET map bolsters my viewpoint. This is just a map of administrative areas. This means that the Ransom-Everglades page should say "North/East Coconut Grove, Miami, Florida." Try sending some mail to an address in Flagami or Downtown ! Also, you might ponder why there are two NET offices in Coconut Grove. --GroveGuy (talk) 04:19, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to but in, but if you type in 3575 Main Highway in the link you gave above, but do not put in city or state, just zip code 33133, the result is Miami, FL. Go ahead, give it a try! - Marc Averette (talk) 14:07, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Miami, Florida

I semi-protected it, so you shouldn't have to worry about reverting that photo any more (at least for a week). Horologium (talk) 20:44, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding sockpuppet

I have blocked you because your editing pattern suggests that you are Miamiboyzinhere, as repoted in Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Miamiboyzinhere (2nd). Another editor, C.Fred believes that the editing pattern was a coincidence and that you're not Miamiboyzinhere. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 04:19, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As OhanaUnited noted, I dispute the block; I feel your account was targeted by User:Miamiboyzinhere, making you a victim of his disruption. I invite you to use the {{unblock|your reason here}} tag to request more investigation into the block. —C.Fred (talk) 04:43, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock|I was unfairly targeted by Miamiboyzinhere for absolutely no reason. This person created numerous accounts similar to mine and disrupted many articles making it seem as if I was doing it. My history is clear and this is completely unjust.}}

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

As per discussions by C.Fred, FisherQueen, Roger Davies, Kevin, and others. — Athaenara ✉ 22:01, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request handled by: — Athaenara ✉ 22:01, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I feel that there is no strong evidence that this user is a sockpuppet, but rather as C.Fred says has been targeted by User:Miamiboyzinhere. I would support an unblock. Kevin (talk) 10:20, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What about User:Comayagua and User:Comayagua69? Don't they rather indicate that this account is sockpuppeting? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:05, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see now; this user's claim is that User:Miamiboyzinhere created those accounts. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:09, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, there's a conversation about this block happening here. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:16, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And also Comayagua98. Look at what he did.[2][3] But I admit this is the toughest challenge I faced in SSP. We can't be sure whether this is in fact a sock, or a person impersonating another to be a sock. We cannot go to RFCU either, since it can't be used to proof innocence. Guys, give me some ideas on what to do. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 17:34, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock. There's no concrete evidence that this account was ever used for vandalism. At least a year of edit history with nary a warning. —C.Fred (talk) 18:41, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. If you look at my history, I've been a member for a long time and I've contributed a lot to the website. It wasn't until recently, Miamiboyzinhere began to create usernames similar to mine to make me a victim. You can also see edits where I've had arguments with him reverting edits to inappropriate material see: Brickell, Miami, Florida or South Florida metropolitan area where he purposefully changes edits I've done to his removing text and images. The user even insulted me for reverting his edits because an image had been changed in the Brickell, Miami, Florida article. Again, thank you. --Comayagua99 (talk) 20:25, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps no warning templates, but I warned him (without using templates as he seemed to be an established editor) here, here and here about disruptive edits. However, this was eight months ago, and I have had no further occasion to question his edits, even though our editing interests seem to overlap a lot. -- Donald Albury 21:16, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support unblock. Looking at this user's edit-history makes me think he's almost certainly the victim and not the culprit here. This talk page is on plenty of people's watchlists now, so if we're wrong and this user is naughty, it won't be hard to re-block. I doubt we'll have to, though. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:33, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question: should Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Miamiboyzinhere (2nd) be updated to reflect subsequent discussion and events? — Athaenara ✉ 22:20, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a link to this discussion as a postscript to the sockpuppet case. Kevin (talk) 22:33, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism?

I thing it was ill-advised of you to label the image swapping in South Florida metropolitan area as vandalism, as you did in the edit summary. That is strictly a content dispute, which not vandalism. -- Donald Albury 15:15, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. It's from the same user who was changing the images before on similar articles. Not to mention that, both images are good resolutions, contrary to what the user says, which is why I don't see the need to change images, delete galleries and remove content. It's unnecessary. --Comayagua99 (talk) 15:21, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is nevertheless a content dispute. Neither the repeated switching of images nor the edit summaries that you consider misleading amount to vandalism, per Wikipedia:Vandalism#Types of vandalism and Wikipedia:Vandalism#What is not vandalism. -- Donald Albury 15:28, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was vandalism, but not mine. Your images have extremely bad lighting and are not encyclopedic quality in the least. One of them replaced a photo of a street in the article for that street Brickell Avenue and doesn't even show the street. THE ARTICLE IS ABOUT THE STREET. Also, you're supposed to answer a talk on the same page (Yours') that it initiated on, not put the answer on the initiators page so there are 2 half conversations on two separate pages. I suggest you read a bit more about Wikipedia rules and stop vandalizing articles with your crappy poor lighting amateur photography from car windows. 66.176.139.222 (talk) 23:12, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you serious? Who are you to go around insulting my edits? What makes your edits so much better? It's very rude to go around changing people's edits that benefit the article and on top of it go ahead and insult them. Last time I checked, THAT isn't Wikipedia standards. Maybe you should read the Wikipedia rules and stop vandalizing articles. Thanks! :) --Comayagua99 (talk) 02:39, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What makes your edits better? Leave them alone and don't change what's already there to make it worse. If you have a better quality photo, put it in. But you photos are HORRID. So I must help preserve the superior photos that are already in place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.211.229.4 (talk) 05:37, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

YOU HAVE VIOLATED THE THREE REVERT RULE

Yor edits to Brickell, Miami, Florida -

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

@@ Line 270: / Line 270: @@
 :::What makes your edits better?  Leave them alone and don't change what's already there to make it worse.  If you have a better quality photo, put it in.  But you photos are HORRID.  So I must help preserve the superior photos that are already in place.  <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/98.211.229.4|98.211.229.4]] ([[User talk:98.211.229.4|talk]]) 05:37, 27 August 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
+==YOU HAVE VIOLATED THE THREE REVERT RULE==
+Yor edits to [[Brickell, Miami, Florida]] -
+{{3RR}}