Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Maps/Archive 2019

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 2015 ← Archive 2017 Archive 2018 Archive 2019

Location map enquiry

Hi, I was wondering if anyone can help me or point me in the right direction as to an image display question I have. I have had an enquiry about the whether you can overlay a map in the right hand corner (for example) using the "Location map" template. The example would require the France Aquitaine location map with a further smaller location map of location within France at the bottom right corner (could be left if needed)? Is this possible using any template options or do we need another image to be created. Regards Newm30 (talk) 04:37, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

 map projections of a triaxial ellipsoid 

Do you think this subject is notable? I want to make an article about it. Do you have an opinion about best article name? --Sharouser (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:05, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

It’s notable. Maybe, “Map projection of the tri-axial ellipsoid”. Strebe (talk) 06:06, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
Map projection of the tri-axial ellipsoid. --Sharouser (talk) 02:01, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

Bing Maps

Hi, I prepared Bing Maps tool in Toolforge: [1]. Since today you can add it into the map templates here. An example for Egypt: https://tools.wmflabs.org/bing-maps/?article=Egypt. Also I maintain older Windy Maps ([2], Egypt example) and KMLexport ([3]) tools now. Any questions please to my home wiki :) --Dvorapa (talk) 22:59, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

The equirectangular Mercator projection?

Now, I don't know much about maps, but I thought the equirectangular projection was a different kind of beast from the Mercator projection. But there's the venerable old documentation at Template:Location map/Creating a new map definition that says the underlying maps should use "an equirectangular Mercator projection". What's going on here? – Uanfala (talk) 03:11, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

There's no such thing as an “equirectangular Mercator projection”, and nobody has corrected it—probably because nobody else knew what the author was talking about, either. Strebe (talk) 05:18, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Well, I think it's clear the text intends to refer to the equirectangular projection, so I've removed mention of Mercator. Strange how people have presumably been building locator maps for over a decade based on these instructions without noticing that. – Uanfala (talk) 22:59, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I’ve made further improvements. “Equirectangular” is not specific enough. Thanks for calling this to my attentions. Strebe (talk) 23:52, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

A new newsletter directory is out!

A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.

– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Greater Beirut svg map

Hi, would anyone be kind enough to create a map of Greater Beirut in the same style of this map on Beirut? I'm asking here because I'm not able to do so myself. The coordinates on OSM should be N: 33.9838, S: 33.7860, E: 35.6802, W: 35.4220. Thanks for your help, Nehme1499 (talk) 22:31, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Anyone? I would do it on my own if someone were able to tell me how. Nehme1499 (talk) 22:08, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
@Nehme1499: The people over at the Commons Graphic Lab may be able to help you out! T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)talk 07:34, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks! Nehme1499 (talk) 10:39, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

OSM Location map template problem

Hi, @X201 has noted that the OSM Location map template displays a blank map when under a header while viewing with a mobile (as can be seen here). Is there any way to fix this? Thanks, Nehme1499 (talk) 16:08, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

There are more examples in the thread I created at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Odd_blank_map_bug_with_OSM_location_template - X201 (talk) 16:12, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Discussion on FreeMapTools on the reliable sources noticeboard

There is a discussion on the reliability of distance calculations in FreeMapTools (freemaptools.com) on the reliable sources noticeboard. If you're interested, please participate at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § ~ free map tools ~. — Newslinger talk 02:33, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

San Huan on the OpenStreetMap

I've been seeing "San Huan" on the OpenStreetMap because it's there (someone vandalized it).
Then it shows up on our Wikipedia articles when a map to San Juan is linked. Do anyone of you experts know how to fix this?
If it's so easy to vandalize a map on OpenStreetMap, should they be included in WP articles?
Thanks, --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 12:53, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

I removed the link to the map on OpenStreetMap from the infobox because it misspelled San Juan and I didn't get a response here for how to fix that. I poked around a little in OpenStreetMap but couldn't figure out how to fix it so until it's easier to correct vandalism on OpenStreetMap, I won't include them on infoboxes.--The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 02:20, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
It looks like it has been fixed on OpenStreetMap's end, and my guess is the tiles Wikipedia uses were generated during the vandalism and haven't been regenerated from the fixed data. Should be fixed with time, I would force the tile refresh but I don't know how with the Wikimap. SportingFlyer T·C 03:31, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for your answer. I'll be looking out for the correction on other articles that link to the San Juan map.--The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 05:05, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
It seems the issue stems from there being multiple spellings for place names. When the Wikidata has imported coordinates andmap from the Dutch project for example, the map then shows San Huan, correct spelling for Dutch I guess. Then when the map is transcluded on English articles it shows the San Huan (incorrect spelling in English).--The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 01:11, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

RfC on the use of OpenStreetMap

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Consensus is to not end use of OSM... my bad. TheAwesomeHwyh 03:11, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Recently, some users at WP:ANI/I raised some concerns over the use of OpenStreetMap, therefor I propose the below options regarding its further use due to possible accuracy concerns among others. TheAwesomeHwyh 00:04, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Option 1: No change, keep all OpenStreetMap maps as they are.

Option 2: Immediately discontinue the use of OpenStreetMap throughout the entire wiki.

Other option: If you choose this, please explain why. TheAwesomeHwyh 00:04, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Survey

Comment this is an exceptionally problematic RfC. OSM is fine, it’s a sister project, and very, very useful for creating maps. The issue with OSM on ANI was the adding of additional maps to encyclopaedia articles, not with OSM generally. Furthermore, what would we use if not for OSM? They have a great data license for our purposes, and the maps themselves are just as good as the big players, especially in rural/underdeveloped areas. They shouldn’t replace the SVG maps we currently have in articles - THAT is what this RfC should be about, the problem which was presented, not about their use generally. SportingFlyer T·C 01:58, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

​Oh... I misread that AN/I thread completely, then. I have withdrawn this RfC. Also, to be clear I do support the use of OSM completely I had just thought there was people who didn't so I wanted to start a RfC for consensus. Sorry about that. TheAwesomeHwyh 03:11, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Threaded discussion

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
  • @TheAwesomeHwyh: No worries, there was a lot of OSM-bashing going on in that ANI thread. I wonder if OSM contributors would make a lot of similar points about Wikipedia! SportingFlyer T·C 06:10, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
    You could check their talk about it! Negativity about anything not coming from one's own backyard exists everywhere, but in practice Wikipedia is being used more and more in map apps based on OpenStreetMap, thanks to Wikidata.
    You might still find the occasional user who thinks Wikipedia is too messy and inconsistent (due to having millions of users and byzantine rules) to be relied on even for simple things like translations of names, and that managing information in OSM's own format could give better results: but that's normal when you've been used to doing something in a certain way for over ten years. Nemo 06:51, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
  • New discussion at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#OpenStreetMap. Nemo 17:01, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Circumnavigation Map?

Would it be possible to create a useful article map for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_aerial_circumnavigation#Itinerary? Thanks. Alanscottwalker (talk) 18:44, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Dispute on Stereographic projection in cartography

Someone opposed to create seperate article from Stereographic projection. But I think splitting is necessary. We have orthographic projection and orthographic projection in cartography.

Stereographic projection article has huge volume. Elliptical stereographic projection is differ than original stereographic projection. If we add contents such as various formulas of Stereographic map projections to a section of Stereographic projection. Expanding volume of an individual section will create an undue weight problem. See WP:SPINOFF --Sharouser (talk) 00:55, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

I have tagged Stereographic projection#Cartography for a proposed split, so that all involved or interested editors will be aware. Having a discussion away from the article to be split without notifying involved editors is not sufficient to establish consensus. I will not be expressing an opinion in support or opposition to the split, just opening it up for fuller discussion. Lithopsian (talk) 10:56, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

•Support• The stereographic is important in cartography. There is far more material to elaborate on than would fit in the scope of the more general article. Strebe (talk) 04:03, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Comment: I know only a little about the projection's applications in cartography. Editors like me would be greatly helped by a draft, or at least an outline. If the draft in main space keeps getting redirected (which I find over-zealous, but that's another issue), then the draft can be written in draft space. Isn't this the most efficient way to cut through the conflict and get the content on Wikipedia? Mgnbar (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

•Support• Most map projection pages have a pretty consistent format, and the Stereographic page does not match that format remotely, because the mathematical applications drown out the cartographic ones. And I agree with Mgnbar that a draft of the Stereographic Page in Cartography would be a good thing to have before implementing the split. Justin Kunimune (talk) 12:41, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

My versions of SPIC have 2000-bytes content. Most of this content is differ than original article. We should seperate it immediately. --Sharouser (talk) 09:05, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

To be clear, we're talking about this version? Does it conform to the formatting conventions of map projection pages? Is that important? Is it understood that reliable sources are about to be added? In short, is it already good enough? Mgnbar (talk) 11:32, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
It seems like there are a lot of typos (e.g. missing "the" in second sentence, missing "an" in third sentence), and it's lacking the equations and cartographic properties (e.g. circle property). I would add that stuff if I could figure out how to edit it (I guess that's the point of putting it in draft space?). Justin Kunimune (talk) 12:03, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
I put it in draft space: Draft:Stereographic projection in cartography. I corrected the typos and added the equations and cartographic properties. It could still use a history section and more sources. I have access to a copy of Flattening the Earth, so I can add some references to that this week. Justin Kunimune (talk) 01:35, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

•Support• Math people are going to be confused by the cartography applications, and cartography people are going to be confused by the math applications. Better to separate. User:Sharouser's draft does need some improvement, though: in particular, the equations for the transformation should be included. -Apocheir (talk) 00:55, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Support. My questions have been answered. It's too much material for a single article, and there is no reason why the mathematical treatment should crowd out the cartographic treatment. Mgnbar (talk) 15:58, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

That sounds pretty unanimous to me. I'm going to go ahead and move the revised version into main space. @SportingFlyer, I'm going to leave the title as is for now, since it's consistent with Orthographic projection in cartography; changing the name can be a future discussion topic. Justin Kunimune (talk) 13:16, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Map workshop

Please come and help clear the backlog of the Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Map workshop page if you can.

There are requests that are over a month old and have not been addressed and ClueBot III is regularly archiving unaddressed issues that are then being missed entirely. The page does have a template indicating it has a backlog but for how neglected the page is this seems inefficient. Images and maps are important topics that need maintenance at a consistent rate.

Is there any better and/or more prominent way to highlight how neglected this page is? Some way we can try and attract editors from outside just this WikiProject to help deal with the backlog of requests listed and archived? Helper201 (talk) 12:29, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

BAOR Map and Chart Catalogue,

Does anyone know where I could get to see a copy of British Army on the Rhine Maps or their map catalogue? I am trying to interpret BAOR map grid references on the Commonwealth War Graves Website (the "grave concentration" reports) in an attempt to understand personal accounts of The March (1945) - possibly finding further references of use to the article (this might be a vain hope that tests the limits of WP:OR - I am really trying to assess the quality of primary sources). Thanks. ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 09:57, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

I'd suggest asking this at WT:MILHIST - the folks there have been able to sort out much more obscure details than this! Failing that, you might need to try the UK National Archives and/or the National Army Museum. Nick-D (talk) 10:22, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Maps/Archive_2019&oldid=1190235028"