Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Maps/Archive 2024

Merge discussion for "Geomatics" and "Geomatics engineering" needs participation
There is an ongoing merge discussion going on to merge "Geomatics engineering" into the page for "geomatics." Currently there is very weak consensus, and the action is proving slightly controversial, so I'd like to get additional knowledgeable people to comment on it.

Link to the merge discussion here. GeogSage ( ⚔Chat?⚔ ) 08:01, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

What Colors Could Represent
Anyone have a map that uses all of the elevation colors? Octalh (talk) 22:45, 22 January 2024 (UTC)


 * What do you mean? There isn't really a standard color ramp for elevation that would be "all" of them. GeogSage  ( ⚔Chat?⚔ ) 23:06, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Map change request
Please change the map of 2024 Indian general election in Assam.

There was a delimitation in which the constituency borders were changed. But the article still uses the old map with the old borders.

Search "CEO Assam Map" to get the new map. Webaddress of result will be "ceoassam.nic.in", this is the chief electoral office website. MrMkG (talk) 09:07, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

WikiProject Maps/Conventions

 * ''WikiProject_Maps/Conventions

Hello all, After collecting best and most popular cartographic practices into WikiProject_Maps/Conventions about a decade ago, I plan to lightly refresh and update the page, with new best practices now widespread on Wikimedia projects. It would be also interesting to have a section about the emerging cloud technologies such as OSM-based wikimaps, a subject which I don't know much. Could someone with basic knowledge of this project contact me ? Yug (talk)  🐲 08:28, 7 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Maps for Wikipedia and WikiMiniAtlas seem to sum up current Wiki map tech. The Equalizer (talk) 12:39, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
 * It's more advanced that I knew. Thos /Conventions page needs to guide users toward those new tech / best practices. Yug (talk)  🐲 14:55, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I added NNW's new "N series" style to the conventions page and have been doing a little clean-up. I have some OSM experience so if you have some queries feel free to ask me, but I'm a little busy recently. –  Iso chrone (talk) 16:38, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Feedback requested for innovation made
Hello. I have made an innovation to data in infoboxes in some countries' articles. I don't know if it is going to be accepted by the community. I thought it helpful to provide information on the neighboring places, including a map and wikilinks, per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images § Image quality,

Also, according to Manual of Style/Linking § Overlinking and underlinking,

Quiché Department is an example of the work I did. Click on the infobox map option of "Quiché and its neighbors" to see the relevant map. If you click on the links to Chiapas and Petén, you can find more examples and experience the navigation improvement to find information on neighboring places and have a better illustration of the of the region. Sincerely, Thinker78  (talk) 06:57, 15 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Thinker78 (talk) 01:08, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm a bit confused as all the location maps show parts of the neighbouring countries (when appropriate), so my question is: what does "Quiché and its neighbors" show that the location map doesn't? M.Bitton (talk) 01:18, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The difference is that the second map shows the names of the neighbors. Sincerely, Thinker78  (talk) 04:19, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * And a helpfully zoomed-out view providing more geographical context.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  04:52, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The direction of this strikes me as definitely reader-helpful. As long as WP is going to stubbornly refuse to use Open Street Map, Google Maps, or any other modern map API (or implment one of its own) and overlay information on top of maps that are actually zoomable web apps, then WP is badly behind-the-times on map utility. It's intensely frustrating to click on a map in a WP article to get more information only to find that the map is a just a static SVG, PNG, JPG or GIF image and cannot be zoomed in and out to show a wider area. This problem could certainly be ameliorated to extent by providing a switcheroo micro-app that provides multiple maps at different levels of global zoom.  Some initial comments on this exact implementation:
 * The list you tried to create in the infobox was basically mangled, with bare "*" characters. The proper way to do this is this, with (something similar could be done with, but with more obtrusive markup that requires line-breaks and cannot be done inline).  is even smart enough to auto-parenthesize (round-bracket) embedded inline lists. The result looks like this.
 * While the additional map provides immediate utility, including a textual list of all contiguous areas may or may not. I lean toward the "provide more information than less" position on such matter, but I expect there will be differences of opinion. Add additional reason, beyond my own proclivities, to side with more-than-less in this sort of case is that maps are between poorly usable and totally useless for readers with visual disabilities, and of low utility on small mobile devices, while the text links are pertinent for all.
 * When such a list is included, start with the continuous areas that are within the same parent jurisdiction (or general named region, if it's a geographical-region map that doesn't pertain to polities). In this case, that is Guatemala, and it was very confusing to have the list start with Mexico and a state thereof, then later switch to (non-Guatemala-labeled) departments of Guatemala. I think the initial idea was probably something like "start with the northernmost by default and work clockwise", and that might be reasonable for a map in which all the contiguous areas are "equal" conceptually, but it's not intuitive at all in a case like this, where everything is in Guatemala except one entry.
 * Aside from the text stuff, this multi-map approach would be even better with a third map, showing this place's location in the Western Hemisphere. We have to remember that our site is heavily used by school children and by adults who do not have deep education (much less of the sort that focuses on the Western Hemisphere like most Americans and Canadians have), so just being told that something is "in Guatemala" is often not very conceptually useful for any given reader when it comes to individually understanding where in the world a place is. For a perhaps ideal test case, see Ural Mountains which provides a single map that makes some sense to people intimately familiar with Central Asia, but lacks sufficient information on both the mountains' relation to various polities, and where on the globe it is for people who understand the continental arrangement of the world but not exactly where on it are the exact extents of places like Russia and Pakistan and Uzbekistan and so on. (I was trying to cement in my own mind these mountains' exact geographic relationships to the Himalayas and others, and to other major Eurasian land features like the Pontic Steppe, Caspian Sea, Gobi Desert, etc., and I had to go to other sites to do that. Shouldn't've had to.)
 * The underlying template needs to be smart enough to output "show both" when there are only two, since "show all" is not grammatical (in the broad, vernacular sense of that word) when there are only two items. (However, providing three options in a case like this would be better in the first place).
 * Summary: With some tweaks in approach, this multi-map switcher is clearly a usability and educational and navigation boon. An argument can be made that a text-link list of the contiguous areas is also (especially for accessibility reasons, but also generally), though a counter-argument can be made about the latter (but probably not against the accessibility point).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  04:52, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the detailed feedback and will follow your advice. Regarding being able to zoom in or out, I have to point out the very feature that you may have missed. If you click the coordinates, you are transported to the Wikimedia Cloud Services hosting GeoHack, which provides links to a wide variety of mapping services, including a featured Wikimedia map, which you can conveniently zoom in and out to show a wider area.
 * Maybe it is an external link but it is only one extra click away but I get your point regarding static maps. Although the latter may have a value of their own, probably the future is headed towards incorporating the Wikimedia maps in the infobox of relevant articles. I have actually seen some countries' articles with maps that are dynamic and zoomable. Sincerely, Thinker78  (talk) 05:27, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * what do you think about this? Sincerely, Thinker78  (talk) 05:31, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Sounds potentially interesting. Maybe add some sort of directional indicator of where the neighbouring places are? If I'm understanding correctly, something similar is done in Infobox Australian place; see Carlisle, Western Australia, for example. Graham87 (talk) 07:28, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Check out Guatemala City. Not only it has a zoomable map in the infobox but also the map scheme you advised regarding regionality. Sincerely, Thinker78  (talk) 19:41, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * This is all promising stuff!  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  08:16, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Input requested
There is a discussion that may be of your interest that includes the topic proprietary map services, at Template talk:GeoTemplate. Your input is welcomed. Sincerely, Thinker78  (talk) 23:13, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Red boundaries on interactive maps
Can anyone give me a pointer as to how red boundaries end up on interactive maps? What or who codes that? And where? I have two city park articles, where in one, the red boundary is missing, and another one where it is inaccurate. Stefen Towers among the rest!  Gab • Gruntwerk 18:01, 27 March 2024 (UTC)


 * For Shawnee, another OSM tag was missing - I have added it, but it will take some hours to pull the data to the Wiki map servers before it will show.
 * Seneca and others is slightly complicated, in OSM the park is classed as a separate location from the course, two ways to skin this:
 * Either you add the same Q number and missing tag to the course attributes and again wait for replication, it will draw two shapes.
 * If you want one large shape on OSM it will need to be drawn from scratch as a new relation and tags / number added.
 * The Q&A at the top of Template talk:Infobox mapframe explains the tag issue (Q4/A4), The MediaWiki link within it mw:Help:Extension:Kartographer/OSM shows how to create a new OSM relation.
 * Regards, The Equalizer (talk) 20:20, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the assistance. I figured that some kind of server lag was involved with Shawnee, but it's good to have that confirmed. As for the parks with golf courses, I'll have to mull over what the best course of action will need to be. The Shawnee boundary includes the golf course but other Louisville area parks don't. Are you saying an existing boundary cannot be reshaped or that doing that is way too complicated? Stefen Towers among the rest!   Gab • Gruntwerk 20:59, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * If the missing type tag hadn't been added to Shawnee, it would not have shown at all.
 * The parks and courses have been drawn independently and unless you know what you are doing it's better left. Safer to draw a new overall shape as per the instructions given.
 * If happy to use two shapes (which isn't that bad), the real right way to do things is create Wikidatas specific to the courses which will be different Q nos from the parks, then add these to the code for the infobox, but if as you state the courses are integral to the parks simplest is to add the park Wikidatas and type to them in OSM, and wait. The Equalizer (talk) 21:31, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Please understand I haven't looked at these things before today, so I'm struggling to wrap my head around it.
 * Re: server lag, I was wondering about that before and after the missing tag was added.
 * The city of Louisville treats the golf courses as features included in these parks, and that's how I've always known them.
 * I see that creating a new overall park shape would be least disruptive in case anyone is technically depending on the current shape, but on the other hand, I wonder if creating this might cause issues for general users of the area map, to see two different shapes saying they are the park.
 * I suppose that for the time being, to get something done with least resistance, using the existing separate park and golf course shapes will have to do. So, I will need to create WikiData pages for the golf courses and connect those to the golf courses in OSM. Then, somehow I have the infobox show both zones. I guess I'll work on doing this for one park until I can get it to work, and once it does, move on to the others.
 * Thank you again for your assistance. Stefen Towers among the rest!   Gab • Gruntwerk 22:24, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I see the boundary is showing on Shawnee when full screen, will need some time before the thumbnail also displays this (which might need a tweak to get it to show). The Equalizer (talk) 11:38, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Looking for archive of all currently existing maps
Hello, for research purposes I have been looking for an archive of all Maps used on historical articles on Wikipedia. They are enormously helpful however due to the scale of my research project it would be much faster if I could look through an archive of the maps used to demonstrate changing borders of nations over the millenniums! Thank you
 * Please sign your posts. Maps are found on the Commons. See Commons:Category:Maps for maps of all kinds. --Timeshifter (talk) 17:44, 30 March 2024 (UTC)