Jump to content

Talk:Malta/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Signatures:

Bonswa

I was just wondering why my link to my Malta pages (Malta, theGeorge Cross Island) is systematically deleted from the MAlta page?

Many thanks MikeRic (talk) 23:37, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 10:00, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Missing Link?

I have noticed a missing link in the article.

2.2 Greeks, Phoenicians and Romans
2.3 Middle Ages


Looking at the time line exhibits an abrupt gap of eight centuries between the historical times of Greeks & Romans (6th century) and Middle Ages (14th century) that is not explained either in the article.

Two important points about the Malta USA/USSR summit: it was not in Malta, but rather adjacent to Malta out at sea. And it was most definitely NOT the first face-to-face between Poppy [GHWB] and Gorby; During Gorbachev's last summit with Reagan, held in New York, Reagan brought along his political heir GHWB, and the trio--with RWR in the center, 'natch--was photographed with the Statue of Liberty in the background. BRYAN 99.99.22.25 (talk) 12:14, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

The Maltese language is a variation (sub form) of Arabic, so there must have been an enormous interaction over the span of eight centuries with neighbouring Arabic speaking civilizations: Umayyad (661-750), Andalusia (711-1492), Abbasid (750-1258) & Mamluks (1250-1517). I think the organization of the sub headers is misleading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miia (talk • contribs) 14:10, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Malta/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: --12george1 (talk) 03:53, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

After finishing the review, I have to fail this article, you may re-nominate after you revise the article.--12george1 (talk) 03:53, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
General
Nearly the entire article is unreferenced.
Somethings are grossly over-linked, such as "Valletta".
Lead
None of the kilometers have the conversion to miles
I don't think there should be things like "(since [year])", revise it so that there isn't any of that in parenthesis. For example: "It is a member of the United Nations (since 1964)"; revise to something like "It has been member of the United Nations since 1964"
Etymology
Why is there "𐤈𐤄𐤋𐤀𐤌"?
Military
There is no conversion to miles for "250,000 km2" at the end of the second paragraph.
Geography
The word metres should abbreviated, specially 253 metres (830 ft).
Climate
It is unnecessary to have the suffix at the end of the dates, like February 19th should simply be February 19.
"In total 6 months – from June to November – the average sea temperature exceeds 21 °C (70 °F)." - spell out 6.
Economy
Since you have the American version of the dates, there should be 1 May 2004 or 8 January 2007, rather, May 1, 2004 and January 8, 2007.
Banking
Date inconsistency is present again: 17 April 1968, 4 May 2005, and 1 January 2008.
Transport
There is again occurrences of inconsistency with dates.
"This will include a day service from 6am to 11pm and a night service from 11pm to 6am." I am assuming this is in the timezone of Malta, but other people may not know that.
Reference
The following references are "deadlinks": #12, #27, #43, #60, #80, #85, and #106.
References #52 and #80 are simply a URL, and should have the title.

Recent/current events

Perhaps a new section, perhaps sub-section inside (at the end of) the history section, should be added for recent/current events. For example, two fighter pilots from Libya refused to attack citizens, instead flew their aircraft to Malta to escape Gadafi's rule, formally defected there: twitter.com/reuters/statuses/39756068519297024 www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110221/local/two-libyan-fighter-jets-arrive-in-malta-two-helicopters-land latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbeyond/2011/02/libya-colonels-defected-to-malta-rather-than-bomb-protesters.html

198.144.192.45 (talk) 19:20, 21 February 2011 (UTC) Twitter.Com/CalRobert (Robert Maas)

Bit too WP:RECENT. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 10:02, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

How about noting that Malta is a de-facto NATO forward base? http://english.aljazeera.net//video/africa/2011/03/2011375401960317.html Hcobb (talk) 15:40, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Geography

For some reason the text says "Malta is a small floatie that is the size of one's nanu." This appears to be a practical joke, and should probably be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.72.21.86 (talk) 15:39, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Fixed by Marek69. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 15:47, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Official name

The article currently says that Malta is "officially known as the Republic of Malta". This might not be accurate. The term is not established in the Constitution (and the only time it gets mention is in the "neutrality clause" which, in any case, contains some of the most mangled wording of the document).

Note also this article by Giovanni Bonello who states that Constitutionally the official name of the state is "Malta" (Bonello is a former lawyer and jurist with a strong interest in history -- he definitely knows what he's talking about).

Ireland has a similar issue, with constitutionally the official name of the state being "Éire" and "Republic of Ireland" as a "description" (as per the Republic of Ireland Act 1948).

I was wondering how this could be expressed in this article, if instead of "officially known" we should use the word "described".

Demdem (talk) 20:02, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Population needs Citation

Population needs Citation — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.136.216.194 (talk) 02:33, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Names of Communities

Resolved
 – One article moved, further discussion on template talk page Alzarian16 (talk) 23:00, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

I have noticed that many (most?) articles about cities, towns and villages in Malta use the Maltese language articles il, hal, ta', and so on. This is the English language edition of wikipedia. While I am sure those are correct in Maltese, I am fairly certain that are not considered correct usage by anyone when speaking exclusively in English (note that code-switching between English and Maltese is unusually common among Maltese people, some individual examples of speech or writing are not reliable sources).

I'd like to propose that these articles be systematically renamed to remove these articles and prepositions. Rhialto (talk) 14:52, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Actually, most article names do not use include the Maltese definite article before the name of the town (e.g. Attard, Sliema, Lija, etc.) and already conform to the principle. The problem you refer to seems to be limited to the Local Councils template. That is what needs to be edited.
Demdem (talk) 19:44, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
I mostly agree with what Demdem said... with the caveat that we do have articles titled Ta' Xbiex and Ħaż-Żabbar. Are these reasonable uses per WP:COMMONNAME? I don't have too much local knowledge, but some searching suggests that Ta' Xbiex is definitely right but Żabbar seems to be more widely used without the prefix. Alzarian16 (talk) 19:59, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Agreed. Ħaż-Żabbar must be one of the few that needs re-naming. Ta' Xbiex should stay as it is. Particularly since even the British High Commission in Malta (which is located there) uses it that way!
Demdem (talk) 20:07, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
OK, I'm convinced on Ta' Xbiex. I'm guessing it's a similar case to Ta' Pinu where the apparent prefix is really part of the name?
Regarding Ħaż-Żabbar, is seems it was moved from its original title, Żabbar, in February 2010 by a relatively inexperienced and now-inactive user with the rationale that this is the "proper name". I would normally suggest going through WP:RM to get a consensus first, but in this case just moving it straight back should be fine if nobody disagrees. Alzarian16 (talk) 19:35, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Well, nobody's disagreed so far, so I've moved it back citing this discussion and WP:COMMONNAME. Feel free to revert me if you know better. Alzarian16 (talk) 15:53, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Bravo, Alzarian16. How about pursuing the discussion on the talk page of the Local Councils template where the names still need fixing? Move cautiously, though, as feelings have tended to run high there on this same subject (see here).
Demdem (talk) 18:37, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Good idea. I've started a discussion at Template talk:Malta-LocalCouncils#Prefixes in place names so let's see how that goes (comments welcome, of course). In the meantime I think we can mark this thread as resolved. Alzarian16 (talk) 23:00, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

De facto Capital

I see that Demdem has clarified the reasoning behind labelling Malta's capital as "de facto" - that it's not mentioned in the countries consitution. I (respectfully) wonder, though, if this sort of distinction is wikipedia guidelines or accepted by anyone except Demdem. For example, Britain has no written consitution. Does that make London its de facto capital? Bazuz (talk) 07:48, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

First, Britian (or, more precisely, the UK) has a written constitution. What is does not have is a codified constitution.

Now, check out this paragraph in the capital cities article:

Although many capitals are defined by constitution or legislation, many long-time capitals have no legal designation as such: for example Bern, Edinburgh, Lisbon, London, Melbourne, Paris, Toronto and Wellington. They are recognised as capitals as a matter of convention, and because all or almost all the country's central political institutions, such as government departments, supreme court, legislature, embassies, etc., are located in or near them.
Demdem (talk) 19:27, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
De facto however, implies in opposition to some legal principle. Valletta being Malta's capital is a fairly undisputed fact, probably something like customary law. It probably confuses readers more than helps them, as the point raised above is quite obscure. CMD (talk) 09:41, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
De facto does not imply *opposition* to some legal principle but that it is not *founded* on a legal principle. But yes, it is obscure even if correct when applied to Valletta. So if nobody is too keen on it it can be removed.
Demdem (talk) 10:46, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
I support Demdem. Valetta is de facto (in the sense "customary") capital of Malta. Similarly English language in USA. English language in USA as official is only as de facto. Subtropical-man (talk) 11:01, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
De facto doesn't mean such in precise terminology, but in most cases it's redundant, so if it's specified then it has implications which aren't in its strict definition. Stating something is de facto implies there was a need to say it was de facto, and thus that somehow it is contested de jure. Whether or not it is is another matter. Anyway, with that explanation, I agree with what you've posted as well. CMD (talk) 20:24, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
So, can we agree to remove the "de facto" qualifier? I think that CMD has made my point better than I could have - it confuses the reader in an unnecessary way. Bazuz (talk) 12:07, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

This place is part of Africa

Geologically it is part of Africa and should at least acknowledge it. --Hinata talk 14:28, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

The African plate, you mean.
Demdem (talk) 20:24, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Maltese Men?

Should there be a section on the men of Malta? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bear77 (talk • contribs) 03:14, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

There's already an article, Maltese people -- Marek.69 talk 04:39, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Current edit war

He's explained his rationale in the summary, you need to say what you disagree with when you rv him again, Subtropical-man. — Lfdder (talk) 13:16, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Before, also user Edward321 reverted new changes by user Nikkimaria. Some users not agree with point of view by Nikkimaria relative to WP:LEAD, WP:OVERLINK, WP:CITE, WP:USERG.

See below:

  1. removal data and source " Gibraltar lies 1,755 km (1,091 mi) to the west and Alexandria 1,508 km (937 mi) to the east", if when it comes to WP:Lede, these data can be transferred to the section of Geography, do not remove.
  2. removal source to "Throughout history, Malta's location has given it great strategic importance".
  3. removal useful wikilinks: Sicani, Għar Dalam, Phoenicians, Arab–Byzantine Wars, Paul of Tarsus, The Times (Malta) and some other. These wikilinki are crucial in this article.
  4. removal Infobox artwork

Subtropical-man (talk) 13:27, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

1) Maybe I don't understand, but why do we need to say how far Malta is from Gibraltar and Alexandria? They're nowhere near Malta.
2) Seems to be somebody's personal website, not a RS. Also, we've not usually got refs in the lead for articles this size.
3) We don't wikilink to the same thing twice in the same section.
4) Not how infoboxes are meant to be used, see WP:IBX. — Lfdder (talk) 13:54, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Exactly. Neither of those reverting have offered any valid rationale for their reverts. The edit should be restored for the reasons presented by Lfdder. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:05, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

In addition, the removal of the accessdate from different sources. Important because a reader wants to know whether the source is outdated or not (not all sources provide the date that the information was published). It is important to provide wikilinks to the ones mentioned above, not everyone knows these topics and it is important to respect the level of intelligence of the people that are reading the information provided on Wikipedia. Inclusion of this does no harm and I see it better than just digging up rules that could be interpreted as probably hinting that it might not be the best idea. Ssbbplayer (talk) 16:23, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Accessdates are not needed for Google Books links - not only do they provide the date that they are published, but they are static convenience copies of print sources. The accessdate is superfluous and gives no useful information for these sources. As for the wikilinks, as has been pointed out above, the links removed were already linked within the same section - if a reader doesn't know the topic, there is a link to hand without overlinking. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:44, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

'British' model of education: no such thing...

Re. the claim that the Maltese education system is based on the 'British' model: there is no such thing as one single 'British' education system. Scotland's is, and always has been, markedly different from the rest of the UK. There are also differences between the systems in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. I suspect the Maltese system was based on a former 'English and Welsh' model. The phrase is meaningless and should be removed or edited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.182.166.1 (talk) 22:38, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. Diannaa (talk) 02:29, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

MALTA - JUNE 11, 1940 / SEPTEMBER 29, 1943.

The first Italian air raid against Malta took place on June 11, 1940. It was led by 10 bombers "CANT/Z 1007", which attacked the island on 6.55 A.M.. Other attacks followed until 7.30 P.M.. The Italian attacks caused in Malta 40 victimes. These air raids were very important because they extended WWII to the Mediterranean Sea and to Africa. On September 29, 1943 on board the battleship "Nelson", in front of Malta, Eisenhower (for the United Nations) and Badoglio (for Italy) signed the unconditional surrender of the Kingdom of Italy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.144.150.196 (talk • contribs) 06:18, 21 October 2006‎

Location maps available for infoboxes of European countries

On the WikiProject Countries talk page, the section Location Maps for European countries had shown new maps created by David Liuzzo, that are available for the countries of the European continent, and for countries of the European Union exist in two versions. From November 16, 2006 till January 31, 2007, a poll had tried to find a consensus for usage of 'old' or of which and where 'new' version maps. Please note that since January 1, 2007 all new maps became updated by David Liuzzo (including a world locator, enlarged cut-out for small countries) and as of February 4, 2007 the restricted licence that had jeopardized their availability on Wikimedia Commons, became more free. At its closing, 25 people had spoken in favor of either of the two presented usages of new versions but neither version had reached a consensus (12 and 13), and 18 had preferred old maps.
As this outcome cannot justify reverting of new maps that had become used for some countries, seconds before February 5, 2007 a survey started that will be closed soon at February 20, 2007 23:59:59. It should establish two things: Please read the discussion (also in other sections α, β, γ, δ, ε, ζ, η, θ) and in particular the arguments offered by the forementioned poll, while realizing some comments to have been made prior to updating the maps, and all prior to modifying the licences, before carefully reading the presentation of the currently open survey. You are invited to only then finally make up your mind and vote for only one option.
There mustnot be 'oppose' votes; if none of the options would be appreciated, you could vote for the option you might with some effort find least difficult to live with - rather like elections only allowing to vote for one of several candidates. Obviously, you are most welcome to leave a brief argumentation with your vote. Kind regards. — SomeHuman 19 Feb2007 00:35 (UTC)

Someone snuck marketing-speak into the Economy section

I rewrote the part about filmmaking, which was simply ludicrous, and added "Citation needed" tags. I suspect there was a better way to do it, but I'm an inexperienced WPian. I welcome others' corrections. --tgeller (talk) 05:43, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Eh?

What does "Malta is popular with British medical tourists, pointing Maltese hospitals towards seeking UK-sourced accreditation, such as with the Trent Accreditation Scheme." mean? 86.155.0.191 (talk) 12:45, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, could a link to a book exploring the history of Malta written by the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem? For historical purposes. "Ancient and modern Malta : containing a full and accurate account of the present state of the islands of Malta and Goza. the history of the knights of St. John of Jerusalem. also a narrative of the events which attended the capture of these islands by the French. and their conquest by the English : and an appendix. containing authentic state papers and other documents"

Thanks for your feedback. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MNovak2594 (talk • contribs) 03:43, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Location

The location as shown on the map is Sicily!!! I don't know how to correct this. Osborne 14:39, 14 January 2015 (UTC) Perhaps the "ring" around Sicily is correct, in fact the ring runs through Sicily, a little to the north. Malta is so small it does not show! Osborne 21:14, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Osborne, I think you are correct because the eye is naturally drawn towards Sicily, even in full image view. The only way to fix this would be to upload a new version with a new ring that surrounds only Malta. I'll have a look at doing this in a day or two. Green Giant (talk) 11:12, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

The lead

Re: George Cross, Malta Independence Act, etc... this is way way way too much detail for the lead. Kendall-K1 (talk) 01:42, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Kendall-K1. Thanks for your message here, and your question on my Talk page asking why I thought the lead should be expanded. Absolutely not too much detail! Please just take a look at the length of introductions on the Wikipedia pages for the small nation states of Cyprus and Singapore, by means of comparison. Malta's introduction remains smaller than either. It's necessary to include such brief details at the outset, as long as the introduction doesn't become appreciably larger, but in my next edit of the page, I'll certainly try to compress that information a little, and perhaps other parts of the introduction, too. I do accept that an enormous introduction, stretching over innumerable paragraphs, is in nobody's interest - but fortunately, it isn't anywhere near that point yet. You may be relieved to hear that I've already decided not to add a wealth of other brief details, in order to keep the introduction to a reasonable length, in line with those of comparable countries. Thanks again. Zhu Haifeng (talk) 16:05, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

It's not the length I object to, it's the level of detail. Cyprus has a long lead because it has had a convoluted recent history. The entire third paragraph is about the partition, and no such event has happened on Cyprus recently. Singapore also has too much detail and I wouldn't use it as an example. The part about its credit rating certainly doesn't belong in the lead. The lead does not need to talk about awards, the flag, what years Queen Elizabeth was known as Queen of Malta, or the name of the Act granting independence. The WWII Siege was a significant event, I would mention that instead of the the Cross that was awarded afterwards. Kendall-K1 (talk) 17:24, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Kendall-K1, thanks for your reply. I do take your point about the level of detail in the lead, and will reduce it. I referred to the lead's overall length in order to answer your question on my personal Talk page asking why I thought the lead needed to be expanded. I do agree with you that Malta's recent history is not convoluted in the same way as that of Cyprus, but it does nevertheless have a complicated and unusual recent history, the details of which needs to be briefly alluded to within the lead. Therefore, as already stated, I shall reduce the level of detail in the description. Incidentally, when you state that "no such event has happened on Cyprus recently", I think you meant to state that it hadn't happened in Malta. I do very strongly agree with you that the Siege of Malta during the Second World War needs to be referred to. The award of the George Cross, granted to Malta for its bravery during the Siege was highly significant as it was granted in 1942, when Malta was still at war against the Axis powers and when a further Siege remained a distinct possibility. Similarly, the appearance of the George Cross in Malta's modern-day flag, as a recognition of the country's sacrifice and its refusal to surrender, needs to be at least briefly referred to. Incidentally, you may be interested, perhaps surprised, to hear that both the Maltese Government, and individual Maltese in conversation with tourists, have pointed out that the award of the George Cross to a whole country, rather than to an individual or institution, remains a unique event.

Thank you again. Zhu Haifeng (talk) 13:32, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Terrible map

I have to agree with this: "I know, you’re probably like, “Malta? Where is Malta?” (I had to look it up and I’m still not exactly sure what I’m looking at.)"

Why is the map centered on Europe instead of Malta? The lower half of the map should be part Africa, the upper half should be part of Europe. Ignoring Africa and centering on Europe is, well, Euro-centric. Why is there an inset locating where Europe is on Earth? This isn't Children's Wikipedia. Everyone knows where Europe is. Why are all these other countries that are not Malta color coded in light gray and dark gray and light green? This isn't a map of which parts of Europe are in the EU. It's about Malta. Finally, we have inset #2 which, at last, is Malta! The country we are interested in, and it's utterly primitive, containing the crudest outline of the islands' coast.

What we need one map showing some detail of Malta, and it's relation to it's neighbors, Siciy, Tunisa, Libya and maybe Greece and Crete, and one inset showing Malta's position in relation to northern Africa and southern Europe. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:21, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

I think the map is like that because it's part of a series, the SVG locator maps of countries in European Union (green and grey scheme). Which makes a lot more sense for, say France than for Malta. I agree it's a poor map for the reasons you gave. People are going to look at the map to see where it is, not how it relates to the other EU countries. Kendall-K1 (talk) 21:00, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
  • I do not see any!!! problems with the position of Malta on maps, large circle shows exactly where is Malta. Also, current map show approximate and location on world map on the left side. Furthermore, Wikipedia use standard maps for all European states, we will not create exceptions - especially for Malta. Sorry. Subtropical-man talk
    (en-2)     21:24, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
    • What standard are you referring to? Why does this standard require that the locator map place Malta far off-center so as to crop out Africa? The locator map you prefer is centered on Northern Europe, somewhere around Denmark, as if that is the center of the universe. "We do not create exceptions" you say. Exceptions to what exactly? You call Malta a "European state" but have you read the article? They are just as connected to the Arabic and African world as to Europe.

      A good overview of the problem I'm seeing here is found in Wikipedia:Systemic bias. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:53, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

      • Center of map? What are you talking about? There is one map for European states. It does not matter whether the state lies in the northern or southern or western or eastern part of Europe. Also, I know - Malta lies near Africa (like Spain or Italy) but it does not matter. Malta lies in Europe (officially and generally and colloquially) and show in standard map of Europe (like as Finland in far north, Portugal in far west or Bulgaria in the east). Besides, maybe you added a lot of work for create new map, but... your map is ugly and does not make anything better. Thanks to your map the article is uglier, the map is less clear and break the standard in articles about European states. Please do not push own graphics to articles. Subtropical-man talk
        (en-2)         22:37, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
        • What standard are you talking about? This is the second time you've referred to a map standard. Is there a map standard? Where is it? May one read it in order to make maps that meet this standard you speak of?

          The next question is, in what world would a map guideline trump Wikipedia's core policy of WP:NPOV? You haven't stated any factual reasons or arguments to ignore Africa in favor of Europe other than "Who cares about Africa?"

          Note that the map I made was quite easy to do and I'm happy to make changes to make it less "ugly". But what is the justification for the map being centered on Europe? What's the principle here? What standard says we must do it that way? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:12, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

          • Oh my God! According to your theory you have to center the map of Finland, you must center of Finland in map - between the Arctic and Central Europe?!? (map without Southern Europe because Arctic is major!?!). Your map of Malta show only Southern Europe and Africa, without rest of Europe despite the fact that Malta is European (not African) state - nightmare. Please, stop idiotic ideas. Pushing Malta to the map with Africa is not only breaking the rules of NPOV, but also breaking WP:Verifiability - sources show Malta as European state (not African state and not European-African!!!).
          • Can not you understand that the map is centered in the center of Europe - to show the whole of Europe on map. It does not matter whether the state lies in the northern or southern or western or eastern part of Europe, map show the state.
          • There are standards of Wikipedia, for example - templates (including infobox). We do not use their own graphics and signs, we use templates - although there is no official rule of Wikipedia requiring uses of templates. The same applies to other things, if thirty articles use standardized map for a long time - this is de facto standard map.
          • As I've written earlier, your map is ugly and does not make anything better. Thanks to your map the article is uglier, the map is less clear (and misleading) and also break the standard in articles about European states because European states use standardized map. Subtropical-man talk
            (en-2)             23:18, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
            • So you've got nothing? Besides name-calling and insults? Please note that calling other editors idiotic is a violation of the Civility policy. How can I tell what the map standard is if you can't show me the standard? I'm going to make my map a little prettier and then put it back. You have not given any logical reasons to keep a Eurocentric map. Please do not revert if you can't cite any known guidelines, policies or style guides. I'm going to rely on WP:NPOV and WP:BIAS unless someone can point out something better. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:08, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
              • I gave valid arguments above. I repeat in my official version:
              • Your map is of lower quality than the current map.
              • Your map of Malta show only Southern Europe and Africa, without rest of Europe despite the fact that Malta is European (not African) state.
              • Your map with Africa and without rest of Europe is not only breaking the rules of NPOV, but also breaking WP:Verifiability - sources show Malta as European state (not African state and not European-African!!!)
              • The current map is centered in the center of Europe - to show the whole of Europe on map - this is a logical. It does not matter whether the state lies in the northern or southern or western or eastern part of Europe, map is correct and show all states of Europe. Everything is good and logical. But your map is incorrect, show Malta as South European-North African country. And again: Malta is European country (only European), Wikipedia not use maps of Asia, Africa, Australia etc for show European countries.
              • You do not have any arguments for use your map, despite the fact that your map violates the two principles of Wikipedia. Subtropical-man talk
                (en-2)                 00:15, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
                • Shows Malta as an African state? Seriously? How does putting Malta in the center of the locator map make Malta part of Africa? Do you know that 95% of the people of Malta speak Maltese? It is a Semitic language in the Afro-Asiatic language group. Malta also has very strong political ties to the UK, and various other countries. It is in the EU, but it is also closely connected to many other cultures in the region, both north and south. And placing it in the center of the locator map is the easiest way to help readers see where in the world Malta is. This whole thing began with a reader taking one look and not being sure they even knew where the country is located. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:29, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
                  • Besides the fact that you are breaking two rules: WP:NPOV and WP:Verifiability, additionally you break WP:OR. Your analysis of "95% of the people of Malta speak Maltese? It is a Semitic language in the Afro-Asiatic language group. Malta also has very strong political ties to the UK, and various other countries. It is in the EU, but it is also closely connected to many other cultures in the region, both north and south" leave at home. There are not important "connected", fact is fact: Malta lies only in Europe. To show Australia use map of Australia, not United Kingdom - no matter that in Australia official language is English and Australia has a English history and Australians are descendants of Englishmen, currently British Elizabeth II is head of state of Australia. You want to show European country on the map with another continent just because it has some historical connection? To show Europe use map of Europe. Simply. If you have a problem with that Wikipedia is not the place for you. Wikipedia is not a blog. Subtropical-man talk
                    (en-2)                     00:32, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
                    • Please do not try to show me the door. You don't have a right to try to bully anyone away from Wikipedia because they don't agree with you. do you say this to every editor who doesn't go along with your opinions? This is a collaborative project. Don't expect anyone to be scared off by bluffing when you fail to cite any policy or facts to support your dubious arguments.

                      The Maltese people are not just EU citizens. They are also closely related to the cultures of North Africa and the Arabic world. And even if they weren't, their close geographic neighbors are as much African as European. You speak of Africa as if it were the same as the empty, unpopulated Arctic Ocean. North of Finland, there is nothing but ice and polar bears. South of Malta, there are people, who just so happen to have given the country its language and much of it's cultural heritage. Besides the articles on systemic bias in Wikipedia, North–South divide shows some of the consequences of this mapping prejudice. The Gall–Peters projection exists to combat this cartographic prejudice. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:52, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

                      • Again, your text "related to the cultures of North Africa..."... blah, blah. I must you write it with crayons? No matter there are any related/connected. Malta is (only) European country and show on map of Europe. Good God, what a guy - he can not understand basic things. I gave enough arguments. Even I gave you the example - Australia to understand, it did not help. I can see - wasting time. By the way, to change on your map must to be a clear consensus - according to the Wikipedia:Consensus and Wikipedia:CYCLE and also your map may not break any rule of Wikipedia (incuding WP:NPOV, WP:Verifiability and WP:OR) - which is generally impossible because even your idea of breaking the rules. Subtropical-man talk
                        (en-2)                         01:08, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

The new map showing Malta at roughly the center of the Mediterranean is accurate geographically and, most important, historically. The map of the European Union is too recent to even be considered: It is certainly, as they say, "Eurocentric" in the most illustrative use of the word. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 01:25, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Historical outline does not matter, this is map of location of the current country in Europe. All EU/European countries use the same map. Maybe we can use more detailed maps in the section of geography but never in infobox. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 01:29, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Recentism. Wikipedia takes a broad, historical perspective, not only recent events.

I'm not insisting on using only my map at File:Map of Malta with locator.png. I'd welcome any locator map that puts Malta in the center and which treats Europe and Africa roughly equally. If it is SVG format and matches the style of other maps, so much the better. But for the present, I think we should stick with the more neutral one, not the Eurocentric map. Anyone who wants to step up and make a prettier, more consistent map may then do so. I'm working on my own improved version right now. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:36, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Recentism does not apply to maps in infobox, etc. Possible that you are working for nothing. If you want add new map to section of geography - ok, only need to small consensus. But to change main map in infobox, we need to clear consensus. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 01:42, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
So far two other editors agree with my point and zero have agreed with you. Nobody understands your claim that the new map makes Malta look like it's "part of Africa" just because it shows more of Africa than the old map. I think I'm making very good progress so far considering the response I've received to my proposal. Please remember to respect consensus even if you don't agree. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:58, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

The arguments above about Malta being only a European state are pretty silly - the roots of the language and much of the culture is obviously further south. It makes sense for the Malta in the Eurozone map to only show Europe, but not the map in the infobox. Australia is a settler-colony and a red-herring of an argument. Please make the first map less Euro-centric. -- haminoon (talk) 03:06, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

OK, I've uploaded an improved version, with a larger locator, the popular circle around the tiny island dots, and more detail on the zoomed map, with island names and cities. I realize that many editors prefer an SVG map that has the same look as locator maps on other articles, but until someone makes one like that that doesn't center on Europe at the expense of the southern regions, I think this is an improvement based on the consensus of all but one of the editors in the discussion so far. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 03:54, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I don't care what map is used, but it's incorrect to say there's consensus here. Stop edit warring. Use WP:DRN or start an RfC if needed. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 03:56, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
    • I made a revised map which I hope overcame some of the objections, and then put the new version up to see if it resolved the impasse, per WP:BOLD. That is not edit warring.

      Also @EvergreenFir:, do you think Subtropical Man's arguments make any sense? Does the new map violate WP:NOR or WP:V or any other "rules of Wikipedia"? Does it make Malta appear to be part of Africa, or present any false or misleading or uncited facts? If you or anyone else can present his objections in a way that makes some kind of sense, we might be able to resolve the problem. I can't make heads or tails of it. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 04:14, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Malta/Archive_3&oldid=686102879"