User talk:TUBS

Return to "TUBS" page.
Crystal Clear app clock-orange+!.svg
I rarely check this page. Please refer to my
MY WIKIPEDIA DISCUSSION PAGE.
Deutsch? Was gibt's? · English? Yeah man. Just do it. · Francais? Oui, Oui, je sais. · Italiano? Nessun problema! · Nederlands...ik denk dat kloppt. · Latina! Cognosco Latinam. Ergo sum? · Platt! Dat kuer ik ook.



File:Emblem of the Tuvan People's Republic (1943-1944).svgEdit

The shape of the Tuvan People's Republic you used never existed in this period as so accurate boundaries was impossible to create - Tuvan (and Mongolian) topography was not detailed as it is now. If you used my images I was noted using of the modern SRTM digital elevation model to find accurate watershed (= international) boundaries depiction.

So rough but historically relevant boundaries shape is preferable as your modern version is an original research, I guess. Bogomolov.PL (talk) 23:59, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Bogomov. I know nothing about the underlying situation of this map. I'm just an svg-file drawer. That's the reason why de:user:Antemister contacted me at my [German user talk page]. He did some research on this issue and knows by far way better than I do - as far as I browse through the discussions coping with this map, you were involved likewise. The current map -as far as I understand Antemister - doesn't show historic factual borders but a mix of historic factual borders and territories that were claimed by local administration back then. Please discuss this issue with him first and tell him about your concerns regarding this map. Than, please come back and tell me wether to revert changes or how to change the map. If the maps as such were right, and your are only making remarks on the accuracy of historic and modern maps (e.g.: “my” borders are way to detailled for any contemporary map), please tell me, where to find a shape thats was used back then.--TUBSMail-closed.svg 12:32, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
See User_talk:Bogomolov.PL#Emblems_of_Tuva. Bogomolov.PL (talk) 15:54, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
So? Don't understand. Am I supposed to take the bills' shape?--TUBSMail-closed.svg 18:31, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
  • We need try to reflect historical facts: at the Tuvan national emblem was rough boundary shape - only this type was depicted at Tuvan banknotes, post marks, historical emblems images. Boundary shape you added to the emblems (not only mentioned of 1943-1944) not existed in this epoch, you see. Bogomolov.PL (talk) 21:11, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
I don't get it. Can't you please describe step-by-step which boundary shape (which file exactly) I'm supposed to take to fix the files? I still don't understand if you are trying to say that the territory depicted is wrong or if it's just a matter of design and how accurate historic boundaries were depicted back then.--TUBSMail-closed.svg 22:37, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
  • I'm back after Holmes premiere. We have it 5 min. after Britain.
  • Boundaries at the Tuvan national emblem never reflected real Tuva territory extend. Why?
  • w:Tannu Uriankhai was officially Russian 1914-1921 (Chinese before 1914). Its boundaries included easternmost w:Darkhad Valley area.
    * Blue line - my modern reconstruction of the Upper w:Yenisey watershed - the Uryankhai boundary 1914-1921.
    * Red line - Tuvan Peoples Republic territory 1932-1944
    Uryankhai boundary was not precisely known as at this area was no accurate topomaps, my version reflects modern knowledge on Upper w:Yenisey watershed area (I was using up-to-date w:SRTM w:digital elevation model, that is why my boundary is so detailed), but in 1914-1944 nobody in Tuva knew detailed Upper Yenisey watershed boundary so every current Tuvan map was not detailed (see these original images). Tuvan officials issued this post mark with former Uryankhai area claimed by Tuva as its national territory (but small tip at the northern boundary was annexed by Soviet Russia). But Darkhad since 1921 never was under Tuvan control as local administrative divisions didn't took part in Tuvan Independence Congress and had left to Mongolia.
  • Since 1932 Southern Tuva strip was annexed (you can find it at my map), you can recognize this strip presence with the south-western small 'peninsula' (general boundary shifting to the southern direction is not so visible at Tuvan rough maps). This tip is not present at the Tuvan post mark mentioned above.
  • So at Tuvan national emblems, banknotes, post marks since 1932 were present both Darkhad Valley (claimed) and Souther Tuva strip (annexed, we recognize it presence with the SW 'peninsula').
  • So replacing original inaccurate boundaries with modern detailed maps made in the national emblems is definitely an original research and is unacceptable being a sort of an anachronism. Original inaccurate boundaries you can find here. Bogomolov.PL (talk) 00:13, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Alright Mr. Watson. You are trying to explain political backgrounds and reasons why borders were drawn differently contemporary. To be honest: I'm not so much interested and I can't tell what's wrong or right. Please tell me excactly which map of this (left or right) must be incooperated into either File:Emblem of the Tuvan People's Republic (1930-1933).svg, File:Emblem of the Tuvan People's Republic (1933-1939).svg or File:Emblem of the Tuvan People's Republic (1943-1944).svg. If it's just that I'll do that in no time. On the other hand, if this means changing what is depicted, I'll consult Antemister before. So Mr Watson, I'd like to listen to your deduction.--TUBSMail-closed.svg 08:42, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
  • I absolutely agree. I asked Antemsiter to doublecheck your ideas. He said it will take one week or so, so please stay tuned. Thx for your detailed information given above. This helped a lot. --TUBSMail-closed.svg 23:21, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Yes, I've read your discussion with Antemsiter at dewiki. Bogomolov.PL (talk) 18:45, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Globe mapsEdit

Hi!, thanks for the feedback, really was necessary. I will correct the problems with the gradient and the white edge (I will copy the shapes from one of your files). As to Morocco, I only use the data from Natural Earth Data (the border of South Sudan is correct, but Morocco appears as in this map), I do not know much about the border conflict in some countries, I will improve the border of Morocco as you have done (only in the boundaries layer, I think that do it in the polygons layer would be more difficult -accuracy is at risk and the polygons have the ISO 3166-3 for each country-). If there are more border conflicts and claims, I'd appreciate that you correct them (the improves in the same file and the claims in other files... Like you have done). As for the size of the maps, Perlshaper creates default 551.25 x 551.25, this is necessary for properly sort the contents of each layer, one above the other, with little room for error (perhaps... A human error). I think I could resize to 792 x 792 once the map completed (and correct the sizes of the lines again).

I see that the German Wikipedia have a clickable map in each country article, but the new maps doesn't work in this system, I don't know why... I preview the new map of the United States in its article on de.wiki (both have the same center), and it didn't work, I avoided edit the de.wiki articules (and replaced some of your files in Commons) because this problem. The map of Chile which I replaced wasn't in use in de.wiki.

Feel free to edit the maps, I have locked the layers to work on them separately (unlock to edit it), you can edit them whenever you think necessary, images are not unbeatable, we all make mistakes, I'd appreciate you edit any mistakes that you think I have omitted. Greetings from Mexico. --Addicted04 (talk) 15:40, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

  • South Sudan: Sorry. My mistake. I thought it wasn't in the Brazil-globe-map. But in fact, it ain't visible there and thus there's no border issue.
  • Morocco: it's just hwo I did it it. It doesen't mean that your solution is worse in any case. It's just, that I have special ways of how to deal with states like Kosovo, Abkhazia, etc. and with border disputes like Kashmir. Maybe you take a look on my maps and be inspired. But feel free to find your own method of how to deal with this. There's no best map when it comes to contested areas.
  • Clickable maps: File:United States on the globe (United States centered).svg (w/Puerto Rico w/o telling explicitly?) doesn't serve as a valid map for the imagemap data in de:Vorlage:Imagemap NordamerikaGlobus1 (or Template:Globes imagemap (location map scheme)) because image size differs. If you resize your file to 782 × 781 pixel, everything worked fine. That's the easiest way. There's no easier way to transform image data, so that it fits different file sizes. If you make this work (esp. at German:WP), you can of course overwrite my files.
Good luck. --TUBSMail-closed.svg 16:44, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
File:Chile on the globe (Chile centered).svg looks good now. --TUBSMail-closed.svg 17:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Before replacing more maps, I have a question with the gradient: the area marked in red is above him or the gradient is above the whole map (leaving lighter than normal red color #12838)?. --Addicted04 (talk) 20:11, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
If the area marked is above, the lakes are missing, if the gradient is above of the sea but under the countries, the shadow in the countries of the edge are missing. --Addicted04 (talk) 20:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
It's quiet some time ago, but I think the gradient is above everything except some areas near the projection center including the marked territory that are on top. I can't tell why. Can't remember. I think I was afraid that the transparent gradient made the land areas colors look to dark while red areas looked lighter as normal #12838. Perhaps the reason was also my workflow: this way neighbouring countries can be easily marked w/o making the gradient invisible temporarily. However, this is not so important, I'd say. Do it your own way. I just wanted you to know that the sun (or one artificial light source) illuminating the globe will always a bright center and darker margins instead of that original halo ring. --TUBSMail-closed.svg 21:07, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
PS: If you're not sure whether your map is favored over mine, keep saving your files seperately and let local users decide. Or, as I said, be bold and overwrite my files.--TUBSMail-closed.svg 09:50, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
The maps are different, the center isn't the same... If any of my maps has a significant improvement (precision in lakes, borders...), I will upload a new version of one of your maps (if it corresponds to the same coordinates, avoiding problems in the name and templates). Thank you for all the comments. --Addicted04 (talk) 14:07, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Category:SVG_locator_maps_of_Heard_Island_and_McDonald_Islands_(location_map_scheme)Edit

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:SVG_locator_maps_of_Heard_Island_and_McDonald_Islands_(location_map_scheme) has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

23.240.245.62 00:00, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletionEdit

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Affected:

  • File:2010-02-04 Herford 350.jpg

And also:

  • File:2010-02-04 Herford 351.jpg
  • File:2010-02-04 Herford 352.jpg
  • File:2010-02-04 Herford 354.jpg
  • File:2010-02-04 Herford 357.jpg
  • File:2010-02-04 Herford 358.jpg
  • File:2010-02-04 Herford 359.jpg
  • File:2010-02-04 Herford 360.jpg
  • File:2010-02-04 Herford 361.jpg
  • File:2010-02-04 Herford 363.jpg
  • File:2010-02-04 Herford 364.jpg
  • File:2010-02-04 Herford 365.jpg
  • File:2010-02-04 Herford 366.jpg
  • File:2010-02-04 Herford 367.jpg

Yours sincerely, Ubcule (talk) 23:04, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

CrimeaEdit

Hello, TUBS! Thank for your uploading of maps of Russia with Crimea. You called these files with "(+claims)" title, but vandal-user from Poland Bobek deleting Crimea even from files like these. I just reverted his versions and also started the topic in Russian-language forum about necessary of his blocking.--Korvatunturi (talk) 14:39, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

My opinion: my stolen bike is still my bike. It is simple. The annexation of the Crimea does not change the borders. Bobek (talk) 16:47, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
I won't comment in-depth on this. But, I'd like to thank Korvatunuri. To me it seems, that Bobek isn't really interested in a discussion other than exchanging schoolyard arguments. If I was wrong about you, Bobek, please tell me, and I would comment on the process of map making at Commons.--TUBSMail-closed.svg 08:05, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Locator maps of zone of MilanEdit

I saw that you have moved those maps in Category:SVG locator maps of Italy (location map scheme) as well as Category:SVG labeled maps of administrative divisions of countries of Europe (location map scheme) (monochrome scheme). But Milan isn't an administrative division as the regions of Italy are, or as the state-cities of Germany (Berlin, Bremen, Hamburg): it is just an ordinary commune. Don't we have other maps of subcommunal entities? The zones of Milan look similar to the Stadtbezirke in Germany, or like the London boroughs.--Friedrichstrasse (talk) 09:35, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

And also I'm not sure about the colors: this map has a different grey from this one, but maybe the second one is more correct, as the other entities are normal communes (as well as Milan) and all of them ar part of the same subdivision (the province of Milan). Am I wrong?--Friedrichstrasse (talk) 09:45, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Colors: well, that seems to be close enough. I'd prefer light grey for surrounding towns within the Province of Milan and dark grey for divisions outside this very province. However, there's no strict rule. Sometimes, when maps also show foreign countries, it's maybe better to choose dark grey for bordering countries while everything within Italy is light grey. Categories: Every map that matches this color and map purpose should also be part of these categories no matter what political entity is shown. It doesn't effect original categories of this file anyway. Until now, this category ain't crowded at all. If more maps appear and the category gets messy, maps can be categorized in sub-categories following the actual italian administrative structures where communes make up provinces which make up regions. Have a look at Category:SVG locator maps of Germany (location map scheme)>>Category:SVG locator maps of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (location map scheme)>>Category:SVG locator maps of Rostock (location map scheme). For some more sophisticated examples, study Category:SVG locator maps of boroughs in London (location map scheme) and Category:SVG locator maps of barrios in Autonomous City of Buenos Aires (location map scheme) and its' parent categories. See how nice and structured everything can be sorted? --TUBSMail-closed.svg 12:53, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Plz see all-new-Category:SVG locator maps of Province of Milan (location map scheme).--TUBSMail-closed.svg 13:18, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
OK. Thanks.--Friedrichstrasse (talk) 13:29, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
So, I think that this map should have the right colors.
Another question: do you have a model also for maps like this?--Friedrichstrasse (talk) 13:44, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
I'm sorry but no. I don't make many maps like these, though. I'm more the political maps guy. And I don't know a common scheme that many mapmakers are committed to. However, I love Alex' approach to Berlin boroughs like in File:Berlin-Mitte Karte.png and many city maps made by NNW like File:Karte Außen- und Binnenalster.svg. Both Alex and NNW deliver nice examples how polish OSM-based maps depicting urban areas can look like.--TUBSMail-closed.svg 15:18, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Last modified on 15 April 2014, at 15:18