Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2020 February 1

= February 1 =

Units
In this source, an amount of 700,000 is mentioned but I can't understand what unit of measurement is being used. Any ideas?--Ykraps (talk) 08:09, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

It looks like shillings but that seems an odd way of describing the amount. Why not £35,000?--Ykraps (talk) 08:16, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The source refers to specie which means cash money, so the unit of measurement is probably a currency. I suspect that those characters that follow the 700,000 amounts to some kind of optical character recognition version of "£" meaning Pound sterling. But I could be wrong. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  08:23, 1 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Google books shows "700,000ℓ.", with an italic minuscule letter ℓ rather than a slash. This used to be an abbreviation for pound sterling (see the quote by Joseph Chitty at Wiktionary's page for "l"). --Lambiam 10:23, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Agreed, like this example. Alansplodge (talk) 14:34, 1 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Ah, yes. As in LSD. It looked like a slash to me, which I thought was shillings. Like 2/6 (two 'n' six). Thanks all.--Ykraps (talk) 16:32, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Voting system in Miami
It looks like a "hybrid" system, punch card / optical scan; was the ballot inserted into an electronic ballot box and how was the ballots counted? We are talking about many years ago, I wait for your explanations, if you want. Thanks so much. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kf6_skTdMX8 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.41.100.198 (talk) 13:36, 1 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Are you writing a book or something (a good idea I guess)? What are the main sources you have looked at?  Media reporting of the time had a lot of info, and the NORC survey a few years later had some too.  There were a couple of books about the legal and political maneuvering around those vote counts, but I don't think they had much technical info.  Internet forums of the era aren't online any more, but some archive snapshots are floating around that a serious researcher could possibly put their hands on. 2601:648:8202:96B0:0:0:0:E118 (talk) 08:15, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

No, I'm not writing any books, but I have a visceral passion for these things; the voting machines, so to speak: they drive me crazy, I confess. Go crazy not like a beautiful woman, of course! However, I have already written to whom I owe and I am confident in the matter. Thank you for your answer. Signed the half-serious researcher. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.41.100.198 (talk) 09:48, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Maps/landmarks
Why does the red dot referencing a specific location (for cities, landmarks, etc.) not show up when I expand a map? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.185.240.92 (talk) 21:06, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Can you give an example? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:21, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Any map (just type in any city for an example) has a red dot to show the actual location on the map in the section on the right. When you click on it, the map expands like any other image, but there is no dot to indicate where the actual location is when it is expanded for greater detail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.185.240.92 (talk) 21:29, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Are you talking about Google Maps? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:35, 1 February 2020 (UTC)


 * I don't believe it is googlemaps (unless that is what Wikipedia uses for it's maps). I'm talking about the map on the main page of an article, generally in a box in the right section (when looking up a city for example). There is a red dot to indicate the location on that map, when you click on it and it expands for greater detail, the map shows in (sort-of) full-screen in the browser but the red dot is not present. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.185.240.92 (talk) 21:52, 1 February 2020 (UTC)


 * I assume this is a question about Template:Infobox_settlement.
 * I believe the unsatisfying answer is that the dot is placed with a script and the link just goes to the raw image file, but it's certainly non-intuitive for the user. It has irritated me a few times in the past.
 * You could ask about it on the talk page. Someone watching that page might be able to give you a more complete answer.
 * ApLundell (talk) 21:36, 1 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I will post this inquiry there as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.185.240.92 (talk) 21:55, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Actually it really does not have anything directly to do with Template:Infobox settlement. It has to do whether the article is still using the older but very limited Template:Location map system, or has been switched to the newer but superior, interactive Template:Maplink. The Cleveland page uses both systems, with Maplink showing an outline Cleveland's borders. For landmarks, a blue circle pointing at the location can be used, see University of Paris. The interactive Maplink was only implemented around early 2017, while the older Location map (with the dot is placed with a script and the link just goes to the raw image file) having been used since 2006. To my knowledge there has been no significant push to do a massive replacement of all the thousands of pages still using the older map system. Zzyzx11 (talk) 22:18, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Add another vote that this is very irritating, non-intuitive, and unhelpful to readers. --Khajidha (talk) 00:11, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah. I complained about it on WP:VP/T some years ago, and as I recall I was basically told "Sorry, that's how it works".  I don't remember enough specifics (or what IP address I was using at the time) to be able to look up the actual thread, though. --142.112.159.101 (talk) 03:53, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I asked the same question on the help desk last year, see here. I didn't get very far either. --Viennese Waltz 08:25, 3 February 2020 (UTC)