Talk:Miller cylindrical projection

Comparison between Mercator and Miller Projections
Would the page benefit from a comparison between a Mercator and a Miller projection?

An image could convey this by placing a Mercator and a Miller projection side-by-side centered along the equator.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Celestialorb (talk • contribs) 17:49, 25 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Since the projection is a modified Mercator, that would make sense. Strebe (talk) 06:30, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Replace low-contrast images
I will be replacing images on the various map projection pages. Presently many are on a satellite composite image from NASA that, while realistic, poorly demonstrates the projections because of dark color and low contrast. I have created a stylization of the same data with much brighter water areas and a light graticule to contrast. See the thumbnail of the example from another article. Some images on some pages are acceptable but differ stylistically from most articles; I will replace these also.

The images will be high resolution and antialiased, with 15° graticules for world projections, red, translucent equator, red tropics, and blue polar circles.

Please discuss agreement or objections over here (not this page). I intend to start these replacements on 13 August. Thank you. Strebe (talk) 22:44, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

projection dimensions
The dimensions of the projection are:
 * $$ 2 \pi $$  by    $$ \frac{5}{2} \ln\left[\tan\left(\frac{9}{20} \pi \right)\right]$$

or approximately 1.3639:1 in aspect ratio

108.66.129.231 (talk)

File:Miller projection SW.jpg to appear as POTD soon
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Miller projection SW.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on October 19, 2016. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2016-10-19. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:33, 5 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Well done, Chris Woodrich! As we say in the software development business, "Ship it!" Strebe (talk) 17:25, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Odd revert
Very odd to revert a simple Manual of Style edit with the edit summary "It's not" when the article itself explicitly states: talk) 09:06, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
 * "In GIS applications, this projection is known as: "EPSG:54003 - World Miller Cylindrical""


 * Hello talk, and thanks for the edits. The “World” prepending the actual name is descriptive of that particular EPSG code, just as it prepends, for example, EPSG 54008, “World Sinusoidal”. Within the EPSG system are many variants and conflations of projections with datums+projections, and so you get this proliferation of descriptive terms, but they are not names of the more general projection intended by a Wikipedia article. Strebe (talk) 16:57, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

ESPG or ESRI?
According to http://epsg.io/54003 (which is a good reference BTW ;-)), the name is ESRI:54003, not EPSG:54003.

Update and give as reference?

--OuiQui (talk) 16:27, 14 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Notice the WKT and most other formats describe it like so:
 * PROJCS["World_Miller_Cylindrical",

GEOGCS["GCS_WGS_1984", DATUM["WGS_1984", SPHEROID["WGS_1984",6378137,298.257223563]], PRIMEM["Greenwich",0], UNIT["Degree",0.017453292519943295]], PROJECTION["Miller_Cylindrical"], PARAMETER["False_Easting",0], PARAMETER["False_Northing",0], PARAMETER["Central_Meridian",0], UNIT["Meter",1], AUTHORITY["EPSG","54003"]]|undefined
 * ...with EPSG being the "authority" and no mention of ESRI even though ESRI is the registered "source". proj4js and PostGIS want "ESRI"; all the other string formats want "EPSG" if they use a code at all. There is no conflict between the ESRI and EPSG, so I'm not sure how much it really matters, and I'm especially not sure that Wikipedia should be cataloging these things. Strebe (talk) 17:12, 14 April 2017 (UTC)