File talk:Indo-European migrations.gif

GAC (Globular Amphoric Culture) Removed with Little/No Legitimate Reason?

Why was the [[1]] removed from the graphic? It states in the comments that it was done to make the graphic more "in line with Haak", as far as I can tell. The problem is, Haak doesn't discount the entire **existence** of the GAC. And even if he did claim it didn't exist, that is only one arguably dubious source, considering the **many** others that argue for the opposite. If it has been **proven** that something is not factual historically and is accepted by the entire community as being invalid, it's understandable to change things like this. But no such thing has happened. Unless the large amount of study I've done, both formally at University and informally on my own, is all false, and if Haak has single-handedly disproven the existence of this culture, which is ***still*** believed by most to have existed, then I apologize, but there was nothing else to prove this is the case. In other words, simply bringing something "in line" with one researcher's or scholar's opinions or studies is no reason to completely remove an entire bronze-age culture from all history! Merely because ***one*** source that feebly claims something (Haak 2006, I believe was mentioned?) is offered as proof of historical evidence and fact (compared to the **many** sources that disagree) it is **not** perfectly OK to completely disregard all the other sources without offering any explanation.

This kind of change, brought on, seemingly, at least, by the **opinions** or bias gleaned from reading one paper, without even bothering to state the reasons (there **should** be more than one, at the least) for the change, only serves to confuse those who **aren't** familiar with IE language studies or the migrations of early bronze-age peoples throughout Eurasia in the 3rd millennium BC, and causes those of us who **are** knowledgeable on the subject to suppose that perhaps it's just the opinionated wish of the one who changes it to antagonize and cause discord. (Forgive my crude writing—I should've waited till I was awake in the morning to do this, but was worried I'd forget—lots to do tomorrow).

Don't worry. I don't plan on reverting the change, as I'd hate it if someone did that to my work. But I ***would*** certainly like an explanation of why this relatively ***large*** change was made with almost no reason given. It's disrespectful to the entire group of preceding Wikimedians who added and edited the image before you, and frankly is is the kind of belligerent thing that insults the entirety of Wikimedia's philosophies while simultaneously misleading the readers who actually still have **faith** in the validity and factual value of the information contained on Wikipedia/-media/etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frostwright (talk • contribs) 02:33, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Italic-Balcanic area is not correct

Can the file maker explain, why the whole Appenin penicula is described Italic, when there was significant Baltic/Illyrian language spoken in heel and when the big parts in the middle were Etruscan? The Italic area on the map is great over-simplification and does not really make sense in any historic era or only wery shortly during certain early Roman era.

Messalpic language has even influenced modern dialec / language spoken in the area, so it's influence was in no means insignifigant. And Etruscan was very influential as well. And these languages are known to exist and not belong to italic languages since Roman era. Could the map either be corrected or if not removed from use and be labelled incorrect as it is not made according the very well known facts? It is so false it definetly should not be used. 91.225.69.21 (talk) 08:48, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

User:Joshua Jonathan Please don't make incorrect maps and at least immediately correct this calibre serious mistakes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.225.69.21 (talk) 08:51, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

To all three contributors above: If User:Joshua Jonathan didn't have this image (and/or it's talk page) on his watch list, he was not aware of your complaints. The second IP editor above even mentioned him, which would alert him to look here, if it was a link (as I mentioned him above, or a ping) and not text only.

Both IP editors initiated discussion, but unless you log in (and if you didn't yet, create a WP account), can't be notified about answers to their concerns.

Frostwright - If/when you log in next time, you shall be notified about this, same as Joshua Jonathan. And please don't be upset about his inaccuracies: in description of this map file he wrote it is more a proposition to show how similar map can be useful - and shall probably gladly update, or even help somebody else (like me) to learn, how to correct this map to something better.

Sources (and discussion) about migrations in question, that could be improved here, are also already available, and more current, at Indo-European migrations and it's talk page. Marjan Tomki SI (talk) 06:59, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Marjan Tomki SI. The animated map is a summary of a very complex topic; complete accuracy is impossible. And it depicts the spread of IE-languages, not all the influences; that's impossible to show in such a GIF. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 07:02, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

How to get animation slowed down?

When I look at it, each step takes about 1 second. Often it seems that is not enough. I proposed to add features to to media viewer to add

• pause/continue
• set different setting interval
• set manual advance mode (and move to next step by pressing a - dedicated? - key, or clicking a button)

functionality, if possible. But it seems current timing here is coded into picture and maybe the above needs to be addressed here.

The problem: if a teacher wanted to use this graphics to explain the subject to novices, one second is not enough to explain next step and verify (s)he was understood. Same problem applies if a step on the graphics is disputed - it not only disappears before discussion ends, it disappears even before it can be started. Can something be done about that? Marjan Tomki SI (talk) 06:27, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

@Marjan Tomki SI: oh my... I don't even remember how I made this GIF. A series of maps, as far as I remember, which were pasted together in an app. Maybe you can download the GIF and convert it to a video-format? Or, maybe, the pictures can be extracted from the GIF, and put in a PowerPoint? (I checked; you can extract the images). Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 07:10, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Yea, I can believe you forgot (8 years passed). You seem to have done it as an experiment to show possibilities and usefulness, and didn't pursue refining it (and nobody else has). The problem: demonstration of usefulness succeeded beyond your expectations, and even if a rough start only it is used in a lot of articles (see File:Indo-European_migrations.gif#filelinks).

People who used that map in all those articles (IMO) mostly couldn't study it in detail (animation to fast), so they just added it where it seemed useful. Those rare ones (including me) who found something lacking mostly didn't know how to make their grievances known to the author (two IP editors, the third with that edit only). I knew how to let you know, and could also do something to help next one understand the problem, and possibly how to go better about solving it.

Also regarding conversion, a template in the article suggest converting to .svg (vector, using les space and with much better scalability) graphics. For about how to do that (etc.) that might be relevant for general map manipulations, that IMO goes beyond this talk page. Some other place might be better, and my or your talk page might be useful to find where some of it has probably been already discussed (a maps related project, or maybe a tool already available), and/or decide what we can do, and how (or who else to assign this task ). Marjan Tomki SI (talk) 12:42, 8 November 2023 (UTC)