Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Han foreign relations 2 CE

Han foreign relations 2 CE


It's not a particularly striking or scenic image, which isn't this image's value; rather, this lists all the major cities, including the ones in Central Asia, and all military possessions, a very expansive and extensive map; and it's detail is its value here that I think should be a role model for all other maps to look up to. It is topographical, and shows trade routes, and hints at the Silk Road. It is therefore of high value to the Han Dynasty (and good for the Xiongnu article to give a bigger picture). This could probably be built on by including the contact with the Ancient Greeks, Macedonians, etc. beyond the Ta-Yuan (which is spelt Dayuan in the image and is to the very western edge of the map), but this is sufficient for featured picture, methinks. Elle vécut heureuse à jamais  (Be eudaimonic!) 22:38, 21 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Nominate and support. - Elle vécut heureuse à jamais  (Be eudaimonic!) 22:38, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose.  The sourcing is weird- it covers relatively trivial matters such as geographical features, but not the main business of the respective settlements and their statuses. Markyour words 01:42, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose . Interesting map, but too plain to be FP worthy in my opinion. Also, there are a few little problems. The scale in the lower right shows 500 mi where it should be 400 mi. Some words are a little difficult to read, like Wu or Panyu on the coast. Green and yellow dots are not so easy to distinguish. Finally, I am not sure I understand the meaning of the text about the eastern coastline. --Bernard Helmstetter 21:02, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * On second thought, Neutral. A couple more remarks. NJ-MAN should probably appear in the abbreviation list. And I don't understand if words in capital letters are meant to indicate people, cities or regions. Some of these, but not all, seem to be associated with dots, so it is confusing. --Bernard Helmstetter 17:55, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The NJ-MAN thing has been fixed up. The small capital letters are meant to indicate peoples, as is shown in the key on the left. I can see how it may be confusing in the western regions, where some peoples overlap with tributary states. In that area sometimes one people are divided into two tributary states. There are also some peoples who did not recognise the authority of the Han empire.  I tend to think that it shouldn't be so confusing for someone with some familiarity with Han history. Yeu Ninje 12:54, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral . I like a lot about the map, but it has issues. For one, I don't think it really does a good job of fully illustrating Han's foreign relations of the period. Perhaps someone can address the concerns and upload an updated version. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 21:45, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. Good changes. The format should be PNG (as noted by Renata) and the white lines (communication and transport routes, see image description page) should be made explicit in the legend, but I'm voting support because I'm betting that Yeu Ninje will promptly address those issues. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 20:03, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral, I would really like to see a higher resolution version if that is possible, some of the dots are hard to see. I really appreciate the extent of the documentation though.--Lewk_of_Serthic contrib talk 22:24, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: I'm the original creator of this map. I've uploaded a new version, cleared up some of the errors (like the "500 mi" thing), and attempted to clear up some of the ambiguities (like how the capitalised names are the names of non-Chinese peoples, not geographical features). I've also taken up Dante's point, and renamed the map to "Han Civilisation". The shaded areas are supposed to show the extent of Han civilisation (as evidenced by the presence of Han culture, direct Han political authority, urbanisation etc.); the orange dependent states in Central Asia were subject to indirect Han political influence. Whilst this map may not make it to featured picture status, your comments are still helpful - keep them coming. Yeu Ninje 02:40, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Could you give sources for the extent of Han settlement, and for the the status of the settlements? Markyour words 21:02, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I've added a note to the image which hopefully explains the source: "The shaded areas show the extent of Han civilisation. I've based this on the existence of settlements under direct Han political authority or military control, according to Tan Qixiang (ed.), Zhongguo lishi ditu (中国历史地图集; 1982)." Yeu Ninje 01:16, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Text is small and difficult to read. Many of the letters are broken. Also, the white line is not explained in the legend. I assume these are trade routes, but a reader might not know that. --dm (talk) 05:16, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The key is now more detailed, and explains the white lines. The text, whilst small, should be quite legible once you expand the map to full resolution. Yeu Ninje 01:02, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose - it should be png and not jpg. If the format will change, please remove my vote. It's a very good map indeed! Renata 19:06, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I've changed the format to png and moved the map to Image:Han Civilisation.png. Yeu Ninje 00:53, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. Yeu Ninje 04:28, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * oppose I agree fully w/ the nominator's reasons for nominating this, but the dark brown color used to depict landmass is much too dark, making the black lettering difficult to read.--Jiang 08:45, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. Whoever did this map is awesome. I've seen variants of it used on other China articles as well.  I'm not a big fan of this particular map (I'd prefer the Three Kingdoms one instead), but if this is the one that gets nominated, it has my support. Palm_Dogg 15:11, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. High quality, very informative and detailed.  --Pkchan 14:30, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

(+5/-2/2). Neutral concerns well addressed ~ Veledan • Talk 01:01, 11 March 2006 (UTC)