Talk:List of world map changes/Archive 1

Archive 1

Pages

Where do we put the beginning of this? To the time of the first modern world maps?

Maps

This Belize and Rockall stuff, did this actually made any maps outdated? Did this cause the map of the world to change? I don't mean when Belize became independent, that was most certeanly shown on the new maps, but when it became self-governing? I don't think so. It is my opinion that these additions to the list should be removed.Mátyás 14:23, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree that self-governance would not change a world map, and on a related note, I think entries about internal borders (such as the recent changes to krais/okrugs/oblasts in Russia) in general do not belong here. I have a number of maps and atlases and cannot think of a single world map that shows such subdivisions. They would be shown on a Russian or Soviet Union map, and maybe even a map of Asia, but not a world one. As others have said, this list has the potential to become quite large, so lets not include any more than items that will actually change a world map. SimonX (talk) 00:33, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Not all changes?

I removed 2007: Romania and Bulgaria join EU, because only special maps showing, say, the member states of the EU, would have this data. Such special maps are plentiful and rarely known to the wider public, so I believe we should list only changes that were recorded on most political-topological maps. Following my bad example, you might have added when did some countries join NATO or the African Union or the UN. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mátyás (talk • contribs) 11:38, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Geographical renaming

There is this nice list of name changes here. What do we do about it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mátyás (talk • contribs) 12:16, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

the changes

is there a real use behind this article? It is drasticly incomplete, and only goes to the discovery of the america's, completly ignoring anything before that point, and if it is country changes, where is the usa formation, the various territory aquirerations of it, they changed the world political map... --Jakezing (talk) 14:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion

The article is filled with major holes and even if we added all the major border changes, ect, the article would be one of the largest, if not the largest, on wikipedia.--Jakezing (talk) 04:10, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Normally there are holes, it is a work in progress. And why is size a problem? With this logic, you could delete all the year pages, such as 1600. And discoveries before the one of the Americas are not here, because it is not clear what IS a discovery. I mean, the Australian Aborigines have arrived to Australia some 40000 years ago. Is that a discovery? And when the first humans arrived to America? In any case, I personally prefer to contribute to the post-1945 part of the article, because since then borders are sanctified in the UN. Even now there are many disputed territories, and in centuries before there was chaos.

My opinion is that this article contains encyclopedic data and as such it should be improved constantly, not deleted. If size becomes a problem, it can be cut into smaller pieces, according to eras and territorial units. P.S. Changes of the world map are not important? I disagree, these changes reflect the most important changes in world history. A list of all these changes can be of great use to historians, geographers, and those interested in geopolitics. Again on the pre-Columbian era: what is a map of the world in the ages of antiquity?Mátyás (talk) 12:00, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm gonna be a geography major so I also think this article would be important, but the article

is filled with holes, and mises some key details while minor ones such as the discovery of jamaica, something that would have happend anyways, are listed. Also, you say the australians as the disputed discover, wouldn't the columbus one be OR then as well? The vikings found america before spain did, and people from siberia crosed into the america's via the land bridge currently underwater. So therfor the article is R no matter what. --Jakezing (talk) 13:24, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

So, now you are saying that the article IS important, but because of the many holes and the lack of grading the changes by importance (which can never truly be objective) it should be deleted? I fail to see the logic. It is a list that will probably never be complete. It will forever remain full of holes for the simple reason that many facts are simply not known about early discoveries. And what is this America-mania of yours? Yes, a lot of data on America is not yet added to the list, but you honestly think that means the article is less relevant? And if you do think it should be here already, I agree, add it and help make this article more complete instead of wanting to delete it because of it being incomplete.Mátyás (talk) 08:30, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Texas

As this list was made more complete with the data on the Republic of Texas, it is sad that this data, which seems to be true, was not to the liking of one user, and was therefore deleted. If there are any unresolved issues about the status of Texas in the 19th century, this is not the place to discus them. I myself know very little about the history of Texas, but I am willing to believe that what my fellow editors of Wikipedia have written about it in the given articles.

Mátyás (talk) 10:36, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Sfoske70 (talk) 18:57, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Georgia

I honestly don't know what to think about the breakaway provinces of Georgia. I mean, does a declaration of independence and the recognition of it by a single country (be it a world power or not) make a territory a country or not? And more importantly, did this act of Russia make any map obsolete?--Mátyás (talk) 09:35, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I replicated the metod used with Kosovo earlier: facts only and link to article on the incident.--Mátyás (talk) 13:12, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Fall of the Roman Empire

The fall of the Roman Empire was simply put under an unspecified date in the 5th century CE. As this is a most debated and confusing period of history, I simply removed this entry. It is my opinion that the individual geopolitical changes of the age are to be listed individually, not in big clusters of changes, such as the named "event". This was not a one-time event, such as the dissolution of the Soviet Union (which, although it came suddenly, was brewing for quite some time), but a long series of events. See Decline_of_the_Roman_Empire.--Mátyás (talk) 14:40, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Scope

This list does not remotely know what its scope is supposed to be. Is it border changes? Name changes? City name changes? External borders only, internal borders? I see no remote reason to mention city name changes (bar perhaps capitals), nor any reason to mention internal state changes; that would bloat it horribly. If this is a map of international border changes, then great, but right now it's bloated beyond that. I'd fix it if I thought I could get away with it. Also, the name is bad, the capitalization notwithstanding but it implies that this is somehow dependent on maps. --Golbez (talk) 18:09, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Adding Blank maps

We should add blank maps to the page. The spesh man (talk) 16:07, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Some missing things

Formation of West Papua (province), formation and military defeat of Tamil Eelam, formation of Republika Srpska, Herzeg Bosnia and Republic of Western Bosnia and Dayton Agreement that ended Bosnian war, formation and military defeat of Republic of Serbian Krajina, proclaimed independence and military defeat of Chechnya, etc, etc...why these things are missing? 212.69.10.223 (talk) 16:45, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:37, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

---

List of World map changes → List of world map changes — "World" does not need to be capitalised; however, it will not let me move the page like normal. McLerristarr (Mclay1) (talk) 02:18, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

• Speedy rename this looks like it qualifies for a speedy. 70.29.212.131 (talk) 03:58, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

B.C.E

I'm pretty disappointed with the lack of content from Before the Common Era, hundreds of wars between the empires of Ancient Greece, Ancient Egypt, Minoans, Spartans, Perisans, Romans, Carthage, Assyrians, Phonecians, Edomites, Moabites, Babylonians, Kingdom of Solomon, Judah, Israel, Hittites, Hivites, Macedonians, Selucids, and the list goes on and on. It'd be great if all of that could be added. Imagine- all of political/miitary history on one page. 86.185.205.110 (talk) 23:28, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm dissapointed with everything from before about 1400. However, I think this article should be split into more pages if we did that. Sfoske70 (talk) 18:59, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Current date templates

As I expressed in my edit summary when I removed these templates, I don't understand the benefit in using templates that essentially tell the reader "This map is completely up-to-date" whether it is up-to-date or not. (And somehow, I didn't find the extremely cogent explanation "current date is a yes" to be especially persuasive.) I think the reader will safely assume that the image is intended to depict the current world map, and if that's the concern, then I have no objection to changing the caption to "Current map of the world" instead of "Map of the World" (the capitalization of which should be corrected anyway). But if the reader doubts that the map actually is current, then an automated function that assures the reader "Yes, it's current", regardless of whether it actually is, does nothing to assuage that issue except to camouflage it. The only method I'm aware of to ensure that the map actually is 100% current as of each day would be for someone to manually confirm such, and if that person wants to manually update the date each day that they confirm that the image is still up-to-date, I have no objection to that, either. Theoldsparkle (talk) 18:59, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Palestine declares independence in 1988

I really can't believe this is actually coming to the talk page... Do not remove the entry until the concensus is reached, as that is how it was for the past year+. I am going to cut straight to the chase, keep the Palestine declares independence entry or not. This is a 5 day vote, and ends Monday, February 27, 2012 8:36 UTC. Anything after that will not count. The rule for inclusion is majority (50%+).

Keep it

1. Everywhere on this website, that mentions Palestine on November 15, 1988. On the wikisource it even says declaration of independence. –Spesh531, My talk, and External links 08:36, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Remove it

1. First of all, you obviously don't know how wikipedia works. You don't make these arbitrary rules "5 day vote, after that will not count". You clearly either have no understanding of how consensus works, or you just have so much contempt for the system that you are edit warring and saying ridiculous things like that. This is a very simple matter: the text you have edit warred into the article is unsourced. Palestine did not "declare independence from Israel". That is extremely dubious. Furthermore, if you read the introduction of this article, it explains that the purpose is to be a list of events that have changed the world map. When you look at the world map today, there is no Palestine. Palestine has not been accepted as a country by the international community. They do not control the territory they claim. They are not a member of the UN. The declaration of independence that you are mentioning form 1988 was symbolic. It referenced the 1947 UN Partition Plan as the outline of the land declared by Palestine. In other words, this declaration of independence claimed that Palestine is made up of ~50% of what is today Israel. Clearly, that is not the reality. Clearly, the 1947 UN Partition Plan is not what we see on a world map. Clearly, the Palestinian leadership today is not seeking to create a Palestinian country based on the 1947 UN Partition Plan. Therefore, the text you have included on this page is not only unsourced and dubious, but completely irrelevant and inappropriate. 99.237.236.218 (talk) 21:07, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Discussion etc

WP:NOTAVOTE. That said, it should be included. Independence was declared, and widely recognised. Not being in the UN doesn't prevent mention on this page. We include Kosovo and Abkhazia after all. CMD (talk) 21:30, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Kosovo and Abkhazia control their territory and are included in world maps. Palestine does not control the territory they claimed in the 1988 Declaration of Independence (ie: all the land meant for an Arab state in the 1947 UN Partition Plan) and is not included on world maps. The article mentions the West Bank and Gaza Strip. That is the appropriate way to deal with this issue: those territories are included on world maps. By putting this line about Palestine symbolically declaring independence, the article becomes repetitive and does not satisfy the purpose stated in the introduction and title. This is not about political events/declarations. It's about changes to the world map. The world map did not change as a result of this declaration of independence. 99.237.236.218 (talk) 22:17, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

They don't control all of their claimed territory, but they control some of it. The geopolitical world map changed, and Palestine is included on maps far more than Abkhazia. It's not repetitive at all, as we don't repeat points. Half the changes here are political events and declarations, you've just chosen to pick on a contentious one. CMD (talk) 22:57, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

That's not true at all and I can only assume you are simply confused, rather than being purposely dishonest. Palestine is not included on world maps, because there is no defined territory that is recognized as a country called Palestine. The West Bank and Gaza are separately labelled on most world maps. Accordingly, their status is appropriately included on this list. Talking about Palestine, which includes the West Bank and Gaza, is indeed repetitive. Your response failed to address the core issue. This declaration of independence in 1988 declared a state of Palestine on all the land assigned to the Arabs in the 1947 Partition Plan. That declaration has never been recognized by anybody. It does not appear on any map. I challenge you to find me any world map today showing Palestine according to the 1947 Partition Plan. 99.237.236.218 (talk) 02:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

As for your reference of "half the changes here" being political events and declarations, I should clarify my above comment. This page is about events (including political and declarations) that alter the world map. The other political events and declarations on this list altered the world map. If there are any others on this list, that like Palestine, did not alter the world map, then they too should be removed. I have not found any others. Your point basically is that because there are other mistakes, the mistake about Palestine should remain. That's totally wrong and against wikipedia's principles. If there are other mistakes, they should all be fixed along with Palestine. 99.237.236.218 (talk) 02:56, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

That declaration claimed territory along those lines, but the PLO has subsequently reduced their claim. A change on their map, if you will. Palestine was recognised by over 80 countries in 1988. CMD (talk) 10:03, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Palestine has been recognized by closer to 129 countries as of today, with almost all of those recognitions explicitly referencing the 1967 borders as a framework of reaching a final border through a peace deal with Israel. There is not one country that recognizes Palestine based on the borders outlined in the 1988 declaration. Therefore, it makes no sense to list that declaration on a list of changes to the world map. 99.237.236.218 (talk) 17:47, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

In that case 1988 resulted in a huge number of countries recognising a new state in 1967 borders? Either way it's a change. CMD (talk) 23:40, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

No it isn't a world map change. You keep ignoring the fact that this list is about events that changed the world map. 99.237.236.218 (talk) 01:10, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

And this was a strong geopolitical change. CMD (talk) 07:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

You can keep repeating yourself but you are still wrong. This continued refusal to address the issues I am explaining makes it hard to assume you are ignorant, but rather suggests that you are being purposely dishonest. This event was not a geopolitical change. It was a political change. It did not change the geography of the world whatsoever. You have yet to bring any evidence to the table to suggest otherwise. If nobody brings any evidence or sources soon indicating that the Palestine declaration of independence changed the world map, I will be removing it from the article once again. It is unsourced original research. Wikipedia doesn't allow that. 99.237.236.218 (talk) 18:21, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Your whole issue is that the exact borders declared aren't the same as the current ones. However, you've failed to explain why then over 80 countries recognised it upon its declaration, and why it remains recognised today. That was the initial declaration. Declaring a will to edit war is a good way to get blocked. CMD (talk) 10:31, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

No, my issue is that this is unsourced. As I said, if nobody brings sources to the table showing that the Palestine declaration changed the world map, I will remove it. That's not edit warring. It's adhering to the policies of Wikipedia that require WP:RS. If you refuse to find a source, and insist on reverting my edit, then you will be the one edit warring and breaking the rules, and I will be notifying an admin. 99.237.236.218 (talk) 15:25, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Um, no, if you make a change and edit war it though you are as complicit or even more for edit warring, especially as you were reverted by two people. If you require such a strict source (which is unnecessarily pedantic) for Palestine's declaration, I suggest you either also find one for Israel's independence and expansions or remove them as well. CMD (talk) 13:58, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

You are the one edit warring. I stopped reverting and came to the talk page to ask for sources and rationale. You failed to provide anything so after waiting several days I removed the unsourced content. Now you reverted me. I suggest you self-revert yourself, or I will have to ask an administrator to step in and deal with your actions. You are not following the guidelines of wikipedia. Such as WP:RS. And your silly sarcastic suggestion that I should go find sources for everything in the article is not how wikipedia works. If you feel something else is unsourced and incorrect, you can delete it or start a discussion to delete it. It has nothing to do with this discussion. The Palestine entry is incorrect and unsourced. However, I will say, that if you do start a discussion to attempt to delete Israel or any other country from the list, I will simply find a reliable source showing a world map that contains that country. Of course, we both know that reliable sources don't show world maps containing Palestine. 174.113.154.168 (talk) 15:52, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

It takes two to edit war, and accusing others of this repeatedly is not a good way to progress with a civil discussion. I provided rationale and there is a source on the page. At this point, any third opinion would be welcome (or fourth really, counting Speesh531). My suggestion was an attempt at an analogy to put your request in a different perspective, it's disappointing you find this silly and sarcastic. CMD (talk) 16:09, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Note that there is currently a discussion about this on the Dispute Resolution board. Until now, nobody has yet brought forward any WP:RS that states Palestine is sovereign or that the symbolic 1988 declaration caused a change to the world map. 99.237.236.218 (talk) 15:30, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Micronesia

The link to [[Micronesia]] should be changed to [[Federated States of Micronesia|Micronesia]]. 202.189.98.131 (talk) 20:26, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

 Done Thanks! Dru of Id (talk) 00:57, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Disputed

See section above on Palestine. Also there is a discussion on the Dispute Resolution board. Palestine does not appear on world maps today, and the 1988 symbolic declaration did not even outline any specific land for the State of Palestine. it was merely symbolic and did not lead to any changes to the world map. if someone believes otherwise they need to bring sources supporting their view. otherwise, the entry should be deleted from this article 99.237.236.218 (talk) 15:34, 9 May 2012 (UTC)