Talk:History of Miami

Lighthouse picture
Should that lighthouse picture be on the article page twice? I didn't delete it in case I was missing something, but they look like a duplication to me. Maybe its supposed to be one of those spot the difference puzzles... :) Mammal4 13:46, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Samuel Touchett plantation
Samuel Touchett received a land grant from the British government of 20,000 acres in the area of Miami in 1766. The grant was surveyed by Bernard Romans in 1772. Touchett was having financial problems by then and never attempted to develop the land grant. So, is this too minor a point to add to the article? --  Dalbury ( Talk )  22:07, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Add it, It would be even better with a source also. Thanks --Jaranda wat's sup 22:11, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Featured Article?
I just nominated this for featured article status, I think its ready. Thanks --Jaranda wat's sup 22:39, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Possible copyvio problem.
In the Twentieth Century section I found the following two sentences;
 * At the time, Miami's hurricane was considered the country's greatest natural disaster since the San Francisco earthquake and fire of 1906. Today, the Category 4 storm ranks among twentieth-century United State hurricanes as the 12th deadliest in history.

to be word-for-word from the cited source,, which has;
 * At the time, Miami's hurricane was considered the country's greatest natural disaster since the San Francisco earthquake and fire of 1906. Today the Category 4 storm ranks among 20th-century U.S. hurricanes as the 12th strongest and 12th deadliest.

I'll work on rewording the article, but we need to take a closer look at everything in the article. --  Dalbury ( Talk )  15:39, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing it, I found that in that article and just added that in there with the source where I got that from, my mistake, I rewrote alot from what I got in sources though so no problem. Thanks --Jaranda wat's sup 18:42, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * A couple of sentences isn't necessarily a problem, but I'm uncomfortable with even one sentence copied over (not that I haven't done so). --  Dalbury ( Talk )  19:24, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Tequesta
I went ahead and pulled the bit about the Tequesta building houses from cypress logs. The sources I've worked from for Tequesta say that there is no information available about Tequesta housing. --  Dalbury ( Talk )  01:20, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

I got that source from the Arva Moore Parks book I think --Jaranda wat's sup 01:22, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
 * In "Tebeau, Charlton W. 1968. Man in the Everglades. University of Miami Press", I find, "No description of Tequesta houses is available except those on Matecumbe Key described by Bernard Romans, a surveyor for the British government, who wrote ...we see the remains of some savage habitations, built, or rather piled up of stones; these were the last refuges of the Caloosa [Tequesta] nation; ... These may actually have been a unique instance of the use of stone." I would also note that the Tequesta apparantly lived along the shore of Biscayne Bay and on the rivers and creeks draining into the bay. I suspect they were more likely to use pine or hardwoods from the coastal hammocks than cypress for any construction. Charleton Tebeau was a historian at the University of Miami, so I consider his work pretty reliable. --  Dalbury ( Talk )  01:45, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I removed it. AndyZ 01:50, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
 * And I thought I had. An edit conflict, I guess. --  Dalbury ( Talk )  01:53, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Very strange paragraph
I removed the following paragraph because it implies nothing happened between 1513 and Julia Tuttle's arrival:
 * The Europeans first reached the Miami region in 1513. Following that, settlement gradually occurred, instigated by Julia Tuttle's negotiations with railroad magnate Henry Flagler. By 1896 Miami had become a city.

--  Dalbury ( Talk )  02:14, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Washington had no say
I've removed the sentence, "Washington D.C. approved a few weeks later by telegram." Washington had no say in the establishment of municipalities in a state. Does this perhaps refer to State of Florida approval? --  Dalbury ( Talk )  02:21, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Removed 'child sacrifice' report for Tequestas
The specific incident on which this information was based is reported differently in another source. As I don't have at hand the source I used to first add this information to the Tequesta article, I'm pulling it out until I can sort through the conflicting stories in the sources. --  Dalbury ( Talk )  02:59, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Congrats
Congratulations on getting this article to FA status! Deckiller 02:51, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Congrats from me too! -- S iva1979 Talk to me  18:11, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

White?
I switched the word White to Anglo-Saxons on the paragraph "Early white settlement", because Spanish people are Mediterranean Europeans, and these are White people. If this article is going to be a Today's featured article on May 23 2006, I would recommend serious revising. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.154.242.129 (talk • contribs)

Not all whites are Anglo-Saxon in origin. -- SmthManly  / ManlyTalk  / ManlyContribs  01:46, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

That is obvious!! But the word white is inappropriate. It could be changed to "first non-Spanish settlement". As I said before, Spanish people, Iberian people, Mediterranean people are white. Spaniards, Portuguese, Italian and Southern French! The word should be changed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.154.242.129 (talk • contribs)

Then change it to that and not Anglo Saxon, because both terms and thus incorrect. -- SmthManly  / ManlyTalk  / ManlyContribs  21:01, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Underwhelming and Embarrassing.
The recent history summaries at the end of this article leave much to be desired.

For example, A _SINGLE_ line dedicated to Hurricane Andrew, yet _Multiple Lines_ for Elian Gonzalez and Arthur Teele........... (?) So that's all Miami was about in the 1990s to 2006, hunh? :|

I should be thankful there wasn't more badly coapted mishmash in this thing!

Wiki, you have more time on your collective hands and keyboards than I do, try better next time. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.34.98.154 (talk • contribs) 21:54, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Ball of Wax?
As far as I know, the eighth (spelled as so) ancient wonder of the world doesn't exist. This seems a bit...opinionated? If not...a practical joke? lol funny? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kupo6x (talk • contribs) 10:26, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

It was vandalism by some idiot thanks 64.12.116.135 16:56, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism
I've reverted some vandalism by 169.199.43.56 to the version by Zahid Abdassabur. I post this here because I didn't in thge edit summary - sorry :( Martinp23 16:55, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Written by child...
"By the early 1940s, Miami was recovering from the Great Depression, but then World War II started. Many of the cities in Florida were heavily affected by the war and went into financial ruin, but Miami remained relatively unaffected. Early in the war, German U-boats attacked several American ships."

This is awfully written and I cannot believe this was a featured article. It lacks historical narrative which most of the best articles have; it lacks the neutral eloquence necessary to encyclopaedic writing, and it sounds like a six grade book report. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.184.151.157 (talk • contribs) 13:52, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Was there an "Other" category?
First off, "After the Second Seminole War ended in 1842, Fitzpatrick’s nephew, William English, re-established the plantation in Miami. He charted the "Village of Miami" on the south bank of the Miami River and sold several plots of land."

This should link the William English (planter), not the Indiana politician. (as was done by Donald Albury on the main Miami page).

Second, "So on July 28, 1896, the City of Miami was incorporated with 444 citizens (243 of whom were identified as white and 181 as black)." 243 + 181 = 424. Were there still 20 resident Seminoles?

Third, these numbers might be off, because if in 1896 there were 444 citizens, and in 1900 there were 1,681 citizens, that would be a > 400% population jump in 3 1/2 years. Since neither of these numbers are cited, I figure maybe one or both is just a bit off.


 * I thought the voter/population thing had been sourced. As I remember, the sources disagree. Helen Muir's Miami, U.S.A. states that there were 502 voters when the city was incorporated, including 100 registered black voters. I don't have other sources at hand to check against. I think I'll go ahead and use Muir. -- Donald Albury 02:48, 24 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmm, but # of voters will be much less than the total population, since women and children will not be included. That would explain much of the difference between the counts 444 (or 502) and 1,681.  Thanks for checking that though.--CodeCarpenter 16:13, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Remember that Miami was a boom town, and many men looking for work would have come without families. Note also that Miami's population increased 3 1/4 times to about 5,500 from 1900 to 1910, so the population could have easily doubled in the 4 years from 1896 to 1900. -- <b style="color:navy;">Donald Albury</b> 23:23, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Merge in 'Miami, Florida in the 20th century'
It looks like almost all the text is identical between Miami, Florida in the 20th century and History of Miami, Florida, so this should involve only a little cleanup and conversion of 'Miami, Florida in the 20th century' to a redirect. -- <b style="color:navy;">Donald Albury</b> 00:56, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Support merge. KillerChihuahua?!? 12:05, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Support merge. There is already details here from the 21st century, and I cannot picture someone accessing this item directly from a search page.  As also pointed out in other sections here, there is alot of duplication with the general History page, so that will remove the duplication.  Other cities do not have this split by century, so I agree with the merge idea. CodeCarpenter 16:00, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Miami, Florida in the 20th century talk page
I was going to move this to Miami, Florida in the twentieth century, because "twentieth century" is not a proper noun, however, I then wondered why it was not at Miami, Florida in the 20th century, which I think is more typical. And then I wondered what other Miami are we disambiguating? Why not Miami in the 20th century? While the state is required in the titles of city articles (e.g. Miami, Florida), subarticles are not required to have the state, AFAIK, and shouldn't when it's not necessary. Tuf-Kat 18:48, 29 January 2006 (UTC) The entire '60's is missing, and Miami actually was a very active part of the Civil Rights Movement, contributing much case law that is followed today (during one year in the mid-60's, more Civil Rights US Supreme Court Cases came out of Miami than any other city in America). I have a thesis regarding civil rights in Miami I can cite, as well as old Miami Herald articles as documentation. I'd like to add an entire section regarding the Civil Rights movement in Miami (it was both an exciting and scary time). It will have to happen when I have time, but if there are no objections, I'd like to do it... --LesaDG (talk) 06:14, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure, moving the article to either of those articles is okay. I created Miami, Florida because take a look at the large list of items under the disambiguation page for Miami. AndyZ 20:23, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll buy that. Tuf-Kat 22:24, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Mariel boatlift criminal totals?
I saw that the Mariel reference to Castro cleaning out his jails was removed. Yet, the Mariel Boatlift article again states that this was the case. Over 2400 self-admitted criminals that were deported, 10,000 that were arrested (including over 100 homicides) soon after, and still 800 to 900 that have yet to be accepted back by Castro. So, I would say that this is not a myth, but just a poorly sourced line in the article. We could carry over the sources and text from the boatlift article, but that would lead to duplication. I will leave it to the experts on how this should be done, but complete removal to me seems like overkill and maybe even whitewash. IMO, of course. CodeCarpenter 19:51, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Here is the line that was removed. "Castro used the boatlift as a way of purging his country of criminals and of the mentally ill, as well as further removing possible political dissidents." That's not in the Mariel Boatlift article, nor is it true. The story was put around in Miami by various people to disparage the new Cubans, and perpetuated by movies such as Scarface. In fact our article details the fact that very few of the refugees were criminals or "mentally ill", and at no point does it (or should it) say that there was a policy to purge Cuba of such people. Because there was no such policy. In fact the boatlift was a disaster for the Cuban government, who hadn't anticipated the scale of the mass movement when they agreed to allow boats to arrive.-- Z leitzen <sup style="color:orange;">(talk)  00:47, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Picture
Suggested picture addition: Image:Miami lounge 1946.jpg--Jorfer 00:24, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Just how old are you? -- <b style="color:navy;">Donald Albury</b> 22:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * My user page is correct when it gives the grade I am in and the year I was born.--Jorfer 00:24, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Wait, i'm confused by all this now. -- SmthManly  / <sup style="color:blue;">ManlyTalk  / <sup style="color:blue;">ManlyContribs  00:27, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Me too. This question should have been asked on my talk page, but I answered it here anyways.--Jorfer 00:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I asked because you claim to be the creator of a photograph taken in 1946. So, unless you are at least 80 or so, you cannot be the creator of that image. This does raise a problem about who owns the copyright for that image. -- <b style="color:navy;">Donald Albury</b> 23:24, 22 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Of course I did not take the picture, and neither do I claim to have. I found it on the Wikipedia commons. It was uploaded by User:Naarkotix on the commons if you look at the history. Good thing I ran this by on the talk page because now that you point it out, the tag validity is questionable.--Jorfer 23:32, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * My apologies. I now see that to be the case. Sorry about the misunstanding. -- <b style="color:navy;">Donald Albury</b> 23:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

That is O.K. . Going back to the tag, I don't see any reason for the person to lie about the only contribution he made to the Wikipedia commons when it has not even been used in an article yet.--Jorfer 23:39, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Dadeland mall massacre
From watching a history program about the Miami Vice decade, on Wednesday July 11th, 1979, a couple of gangsters gunned down and murdered several people at the Dadeland Mall in the Kendall area, and according to the narrator, the shootout, more commonly known as the Dadeland Mall Massacre, was very likely the main beginning of the massive crime wave that ravaged Miami in the 1980s and early 90s. Darthvader1 (talk) 05:40, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Don't bother innocently asserting an example of an important aspect that has been overlooked here, as you can see none of these boondogglers are able to wake up and smell the truth. Daniel Christensen (talk) 04:47, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:ZangaraMugshot.jpg
The image Image:ZangaraMugshot.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --11:30, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Etymology?
What's the origin of the city's name? The only bits that I see about the city's name are (1) its early Spanish name, (2) its incorporation as "Miami", but without anything discussing the source of the name, and (3) the idea of naming it "Flagler". Nyttend (talk) 21:34, 2 December 2009 (UTC)


 * The city was named after the river. There is an etymology for the name of the river at Miami River (Florida). -- Donald Albury 15:59, 25 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Check out also the Mayaimi tribe. --Kvanwin1 (talk) 04:26, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Miami named after Ohio Valley Natives or what?
Where does the name "Miami" originate from and how was it applied as the city's name? 173.60.150.244 (talk) 02:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC)


 * The work "Miami" was probably a Tequesta word, though the meaning is unknown. Several ideas have been posited, but none are definitive. The city's founders thought it meant "sweet water". There's no evidence I'm aware of that it has anything to do with the tribe of Native Americans who resided in what's now Ohio. --Scaletail (talk) 14:33, 10 November 2010 (UTC)


 * There is evidence of another Native American group in the area known as the Mayaimi. The name is definitely not related to the Miami of Ohio/Indiana/etc. --Kvanwin1 (talk) 04:29, 25 February 2011 (UTC)


 * To which I would add that, according to Hernando de Escalante Fontaneda, Mayaimi was also the name of what is now Lake Okeechobee, and meant "big water" in the language of the Tequestas, Mayaimis and Calusas. -- Donald Albury 12:06, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Some of the early history okay, but that's it
Much of this "featured article" (something that happened in 2006 when standards and uniformity were much lower) shows how superficial it's subject can be. Much of it is insufficient. It's also quite baised, this going hand in hand with the aforementioned superficiality. There needas to be much more added about the terrible financial crisis this "major city" seems to always be in the grip of, namely the near disaster that happened with the city nearly dissolving. Granted I don't make it out to be as big and bad and internationally significant as some clearly do, by the late 90's it was certainly substantial enough for that near occurance to be an outstanding example of bad leadership. I think perhaps the city would have been better off left to die, so to speak, as New York City nearly was as it reached the brink of financial disaster, also due to maxed out bonds, in the 1970's. Would have been a good lesson and in the end it would be better for it. "Condo boom," "world class city," what is this non-sense? Daniel Christensen (talk) 04:00, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The great thing about Wikipedia is that anybody can edit it, even you. Be bold. Cite good, verifiable sources and make the article more complete. --Scaletail (talk) 18:04, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, and quite ironically, I was the one to first add the bit about the Manhattanization boom a few months ago. I've noticed a trend that even wikipedia follows in which things of or related to miami are generally substandard in quality and genuinity. Daniel Christensen (talk) 00:09, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

This article badly needs a FAR and to be delisted
It goes to show how much lower standards were in 2006. I mean, come on, my Port of Miami Tunnel article is better than relative to the topic. Daniel Christensen (talk) 00:09, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The editor has nominated this article for an FAR, but I have placed it on hold to allow more time for discussion first. The following is his nomination statement:

"I am nominating this featured article for review because ever since the first time I saw it I was surprised it was a featured article. But not really, because all Miami/South Florida related articles are generally of lower quality and have fewer local editors. The reason being civic action, along with a long list of other things, is greatly lacking among that proud group known as Miamians. I'm sure the initial FAN, which did take place way back in '06 when things here were less evolved, must have been the most botched FAR ever to pass this thing. It has minimal references and content for the subject. And now, to top it off, it has the most annoying tag of them all, might I point out all tags are worthless in my book as many of them just sit there for years, the 'this article needs additional citations for verification' tag. If we want the status of 'Featured Article' to continue to mean anything, we need to de-list all articles like this. I would much rather see it be a FA, but for now it needs delisting until someone, not me on this one, finds the time to make it worthy of this elusive status. Good luck finding any such editor with that much of an historical infatuation with the place people go either to hide or to do what they don't confess, the city of vices."
 * Nikkimaria (talk) 03:22, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * So the rationale for de-listing the article as a featured article is that there is a month-old tag? Is that sufficient rationale? Can one editor remove the featured article star on his or her own initiative? I am unfamiliar with the FAR process, so some guidance would be helpful. --Scaletail (talk) 13:53, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The article in general is not up to Featured Standards. It seems to be one of those articles where long ago someone quickly got it up to FA standards now it's just sitting where it has been for five years, even though standards have improved a lot since 2006. It lacks content and references. Daniel Christensen (talk) 19:58, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Even the ratings are low. This article is shorter than both my Port of Miami Tunnel and Kingdom Tower articles that only took me about a week of work, from my phone no less on the latter, to get to GA status and they have over double the references and at least as much content. For the history of a major city this article is tiny. Daniel Christensen (talk) 20:01, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, "2000s: a new era," neutrality? MiamiSpam. Like the billboards on the government buildings. Daniel Christensen (talk) 20:02, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * There is no argument so the FAR should begin. Daniel Christensen (talk) 14:41, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I wrote the article originally. The article has sourcing issues, I no longer have most of the sourcing, one of the history books of the subject, Helen Muir Miami U.S.A is unreliable. I'm going to try to find the second, more reliable book of the subject, by Parks, and the subbooks like Black Miami. Sourcing is rather hard as it doesn't benifit from current news sourcing, such as the Port of Miami Tunnel. Let me see if I could get the books I need, FAR it if I can't find the books by Monday. Secret account 01:00, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Invite to Viva Florida 500
I'd like to invite fellow Wikipedians interested in Florida history to join in our new project page for celebrating our state's 500th anniversay at Viva_Florida_500. Please review and join in getting this project off the ground. It's more than just about Ponce de Leon and his landing it is also about other cultures and what new content we can bring into Wiki such as adding new information about the Native Cultures that were here when this period of discovery began. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ourhistory153 (talk • contribs) 14:40, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Timeline of Miami
What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content. Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 16:18, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

French Huguenots
It is more difficult to prove something did not happen than to prove it did. Somehow a myth has developed that French Huguenots settled in El Portal in 1836. No credible historian believes that this happened. There is an important indian mound in El Portal but no French Huguenot artifacts have been found. For this reason I am removing the information about French Huguenots in El Portal from the article History of Miami. - GroveGuy (talk) 03:07, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on History of Miami. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20041205060517/http://www.miami.com:80/mld/miamiherald/4069371.htm to http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/4069371.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050801234509/http://www.miami.com:80/mld/miamiherald/12261057.htm to http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/12261057.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II <sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS"> Talk to my owner :Online 06:51, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on History of Miami. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101219065120/http://www.urbancityarch.com:80/2009/10/historic-designation-bacardi/ to http://www.urbancityarch.com/2009/10/historic-designation-bacardi/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II <sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS"> Talk to my owner :Online 08:15, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 one external links on History of Miami. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060128221941/http://www.miamidade.gov/info/history.asp to http://www.miamidade.gov/info/history.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061015043721/http://www.thefloridacatholic.org/articles/2005/050415/050415-miami-pope-officials.htm to http://www.thefloridacatholic.org/articles/2005/050415/050415-miami-pope-officials.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060519120557/http://www.miaminewtimes.com/Issues/2005-07-28/news/feature.html to http://www.miaminewtimes.com/Issues/2005-07-28/news/feature.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II <sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS"> Talk to my owner :Online 08:03, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on History of Miami. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070921082855/http://www.hmsf.org/collections-south-florida-birth-city.htm to http://www.hmsf.org/collections-south-florida-birth-city.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.urbancityarch.com/2009/10/historic-designation-bacardi/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?30442241
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?30442246
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?30442250

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:47, 3 April 2017 (UTC)