Talk:Four Seasons Hotel Miami

This article was nominated for deletion on 21 August 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Miami High‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Miami, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the Miami metropolitan area on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.MiamiWikipedia:WikiProject MiamiTemplate:WikiProject MiamiMiami articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Architecture Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Florida Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Florida. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.FloridaWikipedia:WikiProject FloridaTemplate:WikiProject FloridaFlorida articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Hotels Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hotels, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to the hospitality industry, including hotels, motels, resorts, and destination spas on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HotelsWikipedia:WikiProject HotelsTemplate:WikiProject HotelsHotels articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Skyscrapers Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skyscrapers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that relate to skyscrapers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkyscrapersWikipedia:WikiProject SkyscrapersTemplate:WikiProject SkyscrapersSkyscraper articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

Do you still need more pictures for this article? Gaming Freek 02:07, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The one there looks OK to me, but if you've got a better one, put it. - Marc Averette 02:43, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that someone's taken quite a few pieces of information from [1]. Facts can't be copyrighted, but sentences can, making this a borderline case. I've taken the compromise position of removing the stuff that was formulated in exactly the same way, and adding a "see more" link - you can only use sources when citing them. --Alvestrand 08:55, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Emporis states there are 64 floors. The residences website here states there are 70, and that the penthouses are floors 67-70. We appear to have a conflict of sources here. I've been in the building's lobby and pool area on the 7th floor, but it was a few years ago and I can't remember if the buttons in the elevator went up to 70. It seems that the official site would be more of a believable source. Emporis is most likely wrong in this case. - Marc Averette 17:26, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It could be one of those cases when the building labels floors with higher counts than actually exist (Freedom Tower, for example, will have around 82 floors, but floor count will be 108). In those such cases, just sticking with the official count is correct. You're right anyway - Emporis can often be wrong, and official sites are always best to use as primary sources. Raime 22:54, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The residence website cited as a source appears to be a dead link now. It's unclear who created the site and accuracy can't be assured. Elevator counts can also be misleading, skipping 13 for example. I agree that Emporis can be wrong, seen it before a few times, but they will usually make corrections quickly if that's the case. Anyway the threshold for Wikipedia is verifiability not truth

WP:VNT meaning it must be published by reliable sources. The CTBUH and Emporis are the most widely accepted sources for building lists, and they currently both list the Four Seasons Hotel Miami at 64 floors. This article and list should reflect that, unless or until those sources change and correct their data. 1305cj (talk) 16:50, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Houston is located south of Atlanta, and contains 3 buildings taller than the Four Seasons. So this information is incorrect; another instance where Emporis is wrong. Raime 22:53, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 03:21, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article lacks reliable sources and verification of any slender claims to notability. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:59, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added references to Emporis, which support the claim that the building is the tallest building in Florida and the tallest residential building in the country south of Philadelphia. A tallest building in a state is not a "slender claim" of notability. -- Rai•me 17:48, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What makes Emporis a reliable source? It looks like anyone can register and add content. I just registered here. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:36, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AS you said above; Emporis can often be wrong, and official sites are always best to use as primary sources.. I think you meant secondary sources. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:46, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This search demonstrates that it plagiarises material from other website, so pretty obviously not a reliable source. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:50, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It certainly does not plagiarize; look at where those websites are - blogs and forums that are pretty obviously taking the information directly from the Emporis site, not the other way around. Other websites use Emporis as a source; it is frequently cited as an authority on building data in the media, and has been demonstrated reliable at FLC several times. When I stated the above, I was referring only to the floor count - there is consensus at

WP:SKY to use the official height stated by the developer for the floor count of the building in articles. And anyone can create an account, but only verified editors can submit information to the building entries after it has been approved. -- Rai•me 13:30, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

I just registered myself, and it clearly states that any information submitted by all users will only be published on the website if the "Emporis community" (confirmed editors that have been on the website for years) verify the information you present. However, I will keep looking for other sources, as this particular building has been featured in several news articles. -- Rai•me 13:42, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I became a verified editor within minutes of registering - obviously a high quality source - NOT. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:50, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did you actually change data in building entries? I am curious, as newly registered users have never been able to do this before. -- Rai•me 14:04, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have submitted data, but not had a response yet. Have you considered this as a more reliable source [2]?. Or [3], [4] or [5] Jezhotwells (talk) 18:28, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the past, all users must have their contributions verified by Emporis senior editors before any information is posted; if this is still the case, I do not see why the site is unreliable. I opened discussion about the reliability of Emporis at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Reliability of Emporis in building articles, as this issue goes far beyond this article - Emporis is used as a source in many building articles and lists. So far, one editor has responded with "Quite reliable for the U.S., but there you can easily find better printed sources." Print sources would be better, but in some cases are not widely available for non-notable buildings without articles that are still included in lists of tallest buildings. Note that the first link you gave above, CTBUH, which is widely regarded as the major skyscraper resource on the web, has a partnership with Emporis to use its building database information. But anyway, for this particular article, I believe the above links are suitable to use (except for the last one, which just appears to be an advertisement). Cheers, Rai•me 23:35, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]