Jump to content

Template talk:GeoGroup/Archive 2

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

"Export all coordinates as GPX" doesn't work because of a certificate error

The Export all coordinates as GPX feature under Map all coordinates using OSM which points to https://tripgang.com/kml2gpx/ doesn't work because of a SEC_ERROR_EXPIRED_CERTIFICATE on tripgang.com (example under List of airports in Myanmar). --katpatuka (talk) 09:59, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Katpatuka It does work, you have to bypass the error message. --Bouzinac (talk) 19:28, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
I see ;) --katpatuka (talk) 04:14, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Blank screen

Hi, y'all. When I click on Map all coordinates using Google on the List of West Virginia state parks, it returns a blank screen at this URL. Open Streets works fine. Ping me back. Having fun! Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 08:57, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Is there a limit to the number of coords it will display?

I have added some additional coords to Brisbane River over the past day but some of them are not displaying in Google Maps. I count 25 pins in the map but there are 32 uses of the coord template in the article and it is the first 7 coords in the article which don't display, some of which are new but others (the two in the infobox) were previously in the article. Kerry (talk) 22:51, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

It seems to be displaying all of them OK in Open Street Map, so the problems seems to be Google Maps specific. Kerry (talk) 22:53, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

I made some changes to the sandbox template (see Template:GeoGroup/testcases) and would like to get opinions and approval to update the actual template. Firstly, it was brought up on this talk page in September 2017 that the microform.at website no longer exists so the last two links ("Map all microformatted coordinates" and "Place data as RDF") have not been working at least since then. I propose removing these links until someone can find an alternative that works. Secondly, I did some stylistic tweaks to the template, namely getting rid of all the redundant text and also using the full "OpenStreetMap" and "Google Maps" names for clarity. I also got rid of the collapsing and after all the changes the template is smaller and simpler. - Samuel Wiki (talk) 07:38, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

I, for one, like the proposed changes. Thanks for taking this on! --Delirium (talk) 15:39, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Improved clarity, less repetition, same functionality. I think it is an improvement! —EncMstr (talk) 17:21, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Please transfer code from sandbox to actual template. Samuel Wiki (talk) 02:12, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:18, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello, on Czech Wikipedia we have an issue with our GeoGroup template. The template is correct, urls are correct, but sometimes (only sometimes) both the osm4wiki tool (OSM link) and the wp-world tool (Google Maps link) give broken output, as you can see here or here. If you find a GeoGroup template on these pages and click on OSM link, you get broken encoding, but map shows correctly. If you click on Google Maps link, there is no map shown. If you click on Export... link (kmlexport tool), the link is also correct, but the resulting KML is blank. Do you know, what could be the problem? Is there some bug in kmlexport tool (used by all three links)? It happens only for some Czech Wikipedia pages, not for all pages using our GeoGroup template. --Dvorapa (talk) 01:02, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

OpenStreetMap Not working

On many pages that I have tried this on, the OSM integration does not work :(. Here is an example link: https://tools.wmflabs.org/osm4wiki/cgi-bin/wiki/wiki-osm.pl?project=en&article=List_of_New_Jersey_state_parks . I unfortunately do not have much more debugging steps. Acebarry (talk) 16:13, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

What do you mean by "does not work"? I see a list, starting with "State parks/Allaire State Park" and ending with "State-owned historic sites/#56", in a box on the left side and a map of the east coast, centered on New Jersey, with lots of blue pins on the right side. --Tim Landscheidt (talk) 16:45, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
I am not able to see any map. I am able to see the list of points, but not where they lay on a map. 19:22, 8 March 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acebarry (talk • contribs)
Which browser are you using? The map works for me with Google Chrome/Android and Firefox 58.0.2/Linux. --Tim Landscheidt (talk) 02:34, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Google Maps not working

In contrast to the section just above, today, I am getting an HTTP 404 error for the Google Maps link, but Open Street Map is working fine. Does anyone know what to fix? Thanks. --Scott Davis Talk 11:02, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

See Template talk:Attached KML. TheDragonFire (talk) 14:32, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Coordinates for all places of a municipality with their boundary visible

screenshot of the boundary (municipality Igersheim); see OSM-relation 401807

Hello, I'm looking for a template "coord"/"GeoGroup" which includes the coordinates of all places of a municipality and their boundary visible (together). Can anyone help with a solution? Triplec85 (talk) 20:43, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

actual (is)

Example: Igersheim:

Igersheim with the districts Bernsfelden, Harthausen, Igersheim, Neuses and Simmringen.

Map this section's coordinates using OpenStreetMap

Download coordinates as:

+ boundary

See here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/401807 = boundary of Igersheim (municipality)

target (should)

Target: Template "Coord"/"GeoGroup" for Igersheim with the coordinates of all places and the boundary of the municipality!

Does anyone have a solution for this problem? Is this technically possible (coordinates of all places of a municipality and their boundary visible) with the current template? Greetings from Germany Triplec85 (talk) 20:25, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

@Triplec85: You could use a {{Mapframe}} map to display several point features along with a boundary line. - Evad37 [talk] 09:52, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
@Evad37:can you give an example of how it looks like in this case? I have no experience with {{Mapframe}}. Triplec85 (talk) 08:40, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

As an example with just the first three points:

Map
Places in Igersheim
{{maplink |frame=yes |frame-coord={{coord|49.52|9.84}} |zoom=10 |text=Places in [[Igersheim]]
|type=line |id=Q61925 |title=Igersheim |description=municipality
|type2=point |coord2={{coord|49.5631|9.8928}} |title2=Bernsfelden |description2=village
|type3=point |coord3={{coord|49.5726151|9.8318481}} |title3=Bowiesen |description3=hamlet
|type4=point |coord4={{coord|49.5576700|9.8957366}} |title4=Hagenhof |description4=hamlet
}}

You can add as many different features as needed, and adjust styles, frame size, etc using parameters described at Template:Maplink#Parameters - Evad37 [talk] 08:56, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

@Evad37: Thank you Triplec85 (talk) 21:10, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Tool not working

Google maps was taken off this template some time ago and OpenStreetMap and KML have not worked for several days. Firefox and Internet Explorer block GPX as insecure. Is this very useful template now defunct? I see it is back now. Dudley Miles (talk) 11:44, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Broken again. ―Mandruss ☎ 08:56, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Now at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#GeoGroup broken, albeit with what appears to be a different symptom from that described by the OP. ―Mandruss ☎ 09:35, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Getting "Bad gateway" when I try to test Wrecks of HMS Erebus and HMS Terror National Historic Site Kerry (talk) 06:36, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

#1 being displayed as the first entry

I am not sure what I am doing wrong or whether it is an infobox problem, but when I look at the OSM generated for the town Quilpie, Queensland (and anywhere else in Qld), I see pins on the map and a legend that names all of them (organised by section) except for the first one (the pin for the central of Quilpie itself) which appears named as #1. How can I make this say "Quilpie" or better still "centre of Quilpie" or whatever I'd like it to say? This coord is defined within the {{Infobox Australian place}} (unlike all the others which appear in the body of the article). Thanks Kerry (talk) 14:40, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

pin colour

Is there any way I can get the pins on the OSM map to be in different colour? E.g. automatically using the type in the coord (edu, city, railwaystation, etc) or set by me in some way? Thanks Kerry (talk) 14:43, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

GPX

GPX gives a message "Warning: Potential Security Risk Ahead" and refuses to open. Is this a bug? Dudley Miles (talk) 20:46, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Articlee?

Really? --Lineagegeek (talk) 20:58, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

The OSM link is currently broken with a 308 error. Unless the current link can be un-broken, I suggest we switch to wikimap.toolforge.org (example). It doesn't seem to have the ability to handle sections (@DB111: is that correct) but it would still be better as a temporary solution than the dead link. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:38, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

I could fix the 308 thing (new toolforge URLs), but it seems to be something more broken, e.g. project=en links give empty results. And yes, WikiMap doesn't parse the article but uses the GeoData API which is a lot faster so it cannot handle sections but has other features as subcategory handling. --DB111 (talk) 12:10, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
If you consider to replace/complement the current OSM tool in the future, here some WikiMap usage examples:
https://wikimap.toolforge.org/?page=Category:Natural_monuments&lang=en (displays a category)
https://wikimap.toolforge.org/?page=Category:Natural_monuments&lang=en&subcats=true&subcatdepth=3 (displays a category incl. 3 levels of subcategories)
https://wikimap.toolforge.org/?page=List_of_tallest_buildings_in_New_York_City&lang=en (displays article's coordinates)
--DB111 (talk) 22:22, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

I've done some testing of the wikimap URL and it seems to work well enough. OSM is almost completely dead for me at this point. Mackensen (talk) 11:11, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Inline and title coordinates in infoboxes

I am trying to use this template to display hospital articles in Category:WikiProject Hospitals articles. The only articles display are those with only coordinates in title and not inline. It does not display articles with coordinates showing both 'inline and in the title, as recommended by the Infobox hospital template. The coordinates template is included in the Infobox hospital. When I change the coordinates in the article to just display=title, the article is not immediately displayed in the map. Is there a way to make this template work with both coordinates inline and in the title? Is there a latency to updating coordinates that would delay generating maps with recently updated articles? WP:HOS -- Talk to G Moore 15:06, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

No updating coords

Hi, It seems that template don't update coordinates added to articles. I made some tests in preview mode in some articles and it doesn't add the new coordinates to the OSM map. Please, could somebody review that? Bye, Elisardojm (talk) 11:32, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

I found that the system collects co-ordinates from the live article and so will not be current when previewing. — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 18:54, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Doesn't work

@Evad37: This template no longer shows coordinates contain within an article. See National Register of Historic Places listings in Dakota County, Minnesota, as an example. It only shows the title coordinates. It used to show all the coordinates in an article. What changed. -- Talk to G Moore 01:27, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Also tried this on the example in Netherton Tunnel Branch Canal and it doesn't work, either. -- Talk to G Moore 13:01, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

different colours?

Is it possible to use this or a related template to show the markers coloured into multiple categories? My example use is List of wind farms in South Australia which has coordinates for operating, under construction, proposed and cancelled wind farms. It would be good to show all of these on one map (as now) but coloured by their actual status so the cancelled and proposed ones are different to the ones actually built. The wind farms that have not been built still give an indication of where the wind might be suitable, so I don't want to remove them completely.

This might need the {{coord}} template to be modified to carry an extra status/colour parameter, so could be a major exercise if we don't want a hack such as the first character of the name codes the colour (and legend group) if that option is turned on in this template.

Is there a better place to put this as an enquiry or feature request? --Scott Davis Talk 10:37, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Maybe a reference to here at WP:VPT ? — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 11:35, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

GPX option seems to be broken

I don't use the download options myself (I am more interested in seeing the OpenStreetMap display) but someone reported to me that the GeoGroup I recently added to a specific article had a problem but it seems to be a problem with any use of the template. No idea if this is a recent problem or a long-term one. Thanks Kerry (talk) 04:33, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

To expand on this, in both Koumala, Queensland and Kowanyama,_Queensland I have encountered this: At the top is a recently added box which contains a line "Download coordinates as: KML · GPX" If I click on the KML I am asked what I want to use to load .KML files - I have no idea but when clicking on the GPX, I get "404. That’s an error. The requested URL /kml2gpx/http%3A%2F%2Ftools.wmflabs.org%2Fkmlexport%3Farticle%3DKowanyama%252C_Queensland?gpx=1 was not found on this server. That’s all we know." Using Kowanyama as example.Fleet Lists (talk) 05:08, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
I have removed the GPX link for now, until one of the template maintainers is able to find a workaround. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:09, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Module:Mapframe now has the ability to show named coordinates from a source page/section (but not category) as point markers on an interactive map. I'm proposing to add to this template the option to show a maplink/mapframe map, as per my recent edits to the sandbox – see Template:GeoGroup/testcases. It is currently set to be off by default, and turned on by setting |mapframe=yes or |maplink=yes. - Evad37 [talk] 14:18, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

 Done - Evad37 [talk] 01:30, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
In light of the OSM link breakage reported in the section below, perhaps the maplink map should be on by default - Evad37 [talk] 02:00, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
@Evad37: - great idea! Is it possible to use in this article? The links work, but the map (adding |mapframe=yes) somehow doesn't for me? ɱ (talk) 23:11, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
Seems to be working now ... — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:38, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
@Evad37: same for List of lighthouses in Pakistan. It would be great if the maplink could work on here. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:37, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Is it possible to apply GeoGroup to a Navbox, eg {{Brunel}}? If not, would that be a possible enhancement? --Verbarson (talk) 20:50, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

I have asked a question about this template at Wikipedia:Help desk § Ampersand in section passed to maplink Verbarson (talk) 20:20, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Recursive category contents

Option level doesn't seem to work anymore. Is this a fault of the target script or performance precaution? For testing, I went to Category:Shield_volcanoes, started editing, added |level=1, but with the link from preview, Grizzly Butte (from subcategory Category:Monogenetic shield volcanoes) still wouldn't show up. In the target URL &l=1 was added, so the option appears to do something, but to no effect. --Passatizhey (talk) 11:59, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

I had the same/similar problem trying to add {{GeoGroup}} (with level=0) to Category:Isambard Kingdom Brunel. It didn't recurse. I could add it to lower-level categories, and it would show a map for a single level OK. I assume that it should work in normally preview? I never published it as it didn't do what I was expecting. --Verbarson (talk) 10:31, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
We could switch from osm4wiki tool to WikiMap also used on c:Template:GeoGroup (Example 1 / Example 2). The level parameter won't work again in osm4wiki I assume, WikiMap has a subcatdepth parameter (default:5). --DB111 (talk) 14:06, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
WikiMap is better, but starts missing points, see my comments on Duplicate Points below. I see from http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:DB111/Tools you are the author, perhaps you could check it out?Vicarage (talk) 10:31, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Duplicate Points

The list of points need to be run through a uniq filter, as its all too common for the same page to appear twice as a double set of points, because co-ordinates were quoted twice in the same article. See https://osm4wiki.toolforge.org/cgi-bin/wiki/wiki-osm.pl?project=en&article=Category%3APalmerston_Forts

The list of unresolved problems suggests the script has been abandoned, and I couldn't find a support page for it anywhere else Vicarage (talk) 09:29, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Maybe we can use WikiMap instead of osm4wiki: https://wikimap.toolforge.org/?lang=en&wpcat=Palmerston_Forts. --DB111 (talk) 14:07, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
Its certainly better, as it handles sub-categories, but its not perfect, as pages in 2 sub-categories are displayed twice., and some pages are missing. See https://wikimap.toolforge.org/?lang=en&wpcat=Fortifications%20in%20England and note that Southsea Castle (in Portsmouth) is shown twice because its a Castle and a Device Fort. Also the category should include https://wikimap.toolforge.org/?lang=en&wpcat=Forts%20in%20Hampshire 2 levels down, but forts in Gosport (the other side of the harbour to Portsmouth) are not being shown, though they do appear in the intermediate category https://wikimap.toolforge.org/?lang=en&wpcat=Forts%20in%20England.
using the subcatdepth parameter does not help, see https://wikimap.toolforge.org/?lang=en&wpcat=Fortifications%20in%20England&subcatdepth=10 Vicarage (talk) 10:31, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
In fact the subcatdepth parameter only specifies the levels (default:5), subcats=true enables sub-levels by itself: https://wikimap.toolforge.org/?lang=en&wpcat=Fortifications%20in%20England&subcats=true&subcatdepth=10 --DB111 (talk) 16:08, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
You might want to have the presence of subcatdepth implying subcats. But even with both options, Gosport is still missing many forts I'm afraid. Vicarage (talk) 18:18, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
That's maybe because of categorization, so Gosport is only in https://wikimap.toolforge.org/?lang=en&wpcat=Fortifications_in_the_United_Kingdom&subcats=true (needs some time) or https://wikimap.toolforge.org/?lang=en&wpcat=Forts_in_England&subcats=true --DB111 (talk) 14:11, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
I think you are right. I added Category:Forts in England to Category:Fortifications in England and the Gosport forts appear. Have you an opinion of the double display of sites that end up in the map through 2 different routes, as pretty much all do in the area, as they are in a geographical category Category:Forts in Hampshire) and a descriptive one, Category:Palmerston Forts. My preference would be that sites only appear once, perhaps with all categories mentioned, or just an arbitrary one picked. Vicarage (talk) 17:22, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
Sounds good, I changed the output to just one marker per site, although an arbitrary category is displayed right now. --DB111 (talk) 20:00, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
Gosh, that was quick. It looks a lot better now. We still get double display if a place is in a 'List of pages' with one set of coordinates, and as a separate page in its own right, but there is nothing you can do about that. Have you considered making the Category: line a hyperlink? With all the extra stuff in your documentation, like the KML stuff, I think you have a strong claim to replace the existing mapping system, which while it might have (too) many maps, just isn't being supported. BTW, could WikiMap be used on other mediawiki based wikis, as my obsession with forts is because I'm taking content from Wikipedia and other sources and displaying it with hand-rolled maps using the maps extension, and your approach could give me a lot more flexibility. See http://fortbase.johnbray.org.uk/Southsea_Castle. Vicarage (talk) 20:44, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
Another good idea, implemented. Great project! Yet I have no plans to extend beyond the WMF infrastructure, e.g. am I using project's tile servers for the base maps. --DB111 (talk) 23:57, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Using anchor as name

See Rivers of Lake County, California, which avoids geostubs by letting the stub names redirect to list entries. It has several lists where each entry has with coordinates. {{GeoGroup}} (below the main infobox to the right) just names the entries as #1, #2, #3 etc., which is not much use Each of the list entries has an {{anchor}} giving the name of the river. Could GeoGroup pick out the anchor in a list entry that also has a coord, and display the anchor name? Aymatth2 (talk) 16:55, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

You can use the coord name parameter for this. --DB111 (talk) 16:36, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
Great! That works. Aymatth2 (talk) 22:32, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

list of articles, but also some standalone ((coord)) or a section

if an article covers 2 locations, i.e. it uses 2 inline coord and no display=title coord it cannot be added to a geogroup that references a list of articles.

so in addition to the article list, i would like to also include a section parameter. Nowakki (talk) 07:54, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

different colors for the markers

i would like to display 2 classes of things simultaneously.

different size for the markers would also be nice. Nowakki (talk) 13:07, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Problem at the South Pole

The GeoGroup in List of highest astronomical observatories does not work correctly for the observatory at the South Pole, at 90°00′S 0°00′E / 90.000°S 0.000°E / -90.000; 0.000 (Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station Martin A. Pomerantz Observatory). Accessing OpenStreetMap via the GeoGroup link causes the pin for the South Pole to appear in an arbitrary place, which moves as you zoom in and out. Accessing OpenStreetMap directly from the coord link works correctly. This looks like a bug – is there a valid workaround? Verbcatcher (talk) 05:29, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Suppressing coordinates

Map all coordinates in "Groom, Texas" using OpenStreetMap

Download coordinates as:

Would it be possible to add a parameter to a {{coord}} entry that would make {{GeoGroup}} skip it? This is to deal with a problem in Category:Towns in Texas which includes Groom, Texas, which in turn has a valid {{coord}} for a related location in Spain. "...Many claim this cross to be the largest in the Western Hemisphere. However, it is smaller than the cross erected in the Valle de los Caídos in Spain, located at 40°38′29″N 04°09′26″W / 40.64139°N 4.15722°W / 40.64139; -4.15722 and elevated 500 feet (152.4 m) overground..." Aymatth2 (talk) 17:57, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Remove the coord and just link to Valle de los Caídos instead. --87.158.47.224 (talk) 08:47, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
Done. Maybe there is sometimes value in coords like this that do not directly relate to the article topic, but this is not one. Aymatth2 (talk) 16:56, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
This problem actually arises in Commons, where a photo subject (person, animal, artifact) from one place is photographed in another. The picture creates a misleading distant dot on the maps for the subject's home categories. Jim.henderson (talk) 12:06, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Template appears to process coordinates templates inside HTML comments, which it should not do

Please see this discussion for details. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:49, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

The OSM link hasn't been working for me the past few days - the list of locations appears in the left pane, but the right pane is blank. Not sure if the tool linked to is broken, being fixed, or just not working for me? Warofdreams talk 23:03, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Service is now back up. Warofdreams talk 00:18, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Microformats: time to remove all mentions?

The current GeoGroup documentation mentions microformats as follows:

  • (struck through) "Export Microformatted coordinates from the Wikipedia page in a GeoRSS file. (No longer working)"
  • (struck through) "Export place data in an RDF file. (No longer working)"
  • and, under "Usage":
"Inline coordinates can be associated with a name using {{Coord}} with the |name= parameter, such as:
{{coord|1|2|type:landmark|name=Interesting uncharted point in the sea}}
However, do not use the |name= parameter when the coordinates are within a parent template or table which emits a microformat, such as an infobox."

Question: Is microformatting, or emission of microformats, at all in use? And if not, shouldn't that dictum in "Usage" be eliminated. If it is in use, then does that make sense, anyhow? I believe that the dictum is ignored in practice, i.e. that perhaps no one editing infoboxes (that involve microformats or not) is even aware of the dictum.

Background: Many years ago, provisions for use of microformats in infoboxes and elsewhere was proposed and rolled out (overly aggressively IMHO). At the time I myself did not believe there ever was any programmer or other user, anywhere, that used microformat emissions, and I never heard of any usage by anyone, for any purpose, thereafter (and a few times I did google searches). And subsequently, wikidata was invented and became a thing, and it may have completely replaced whatever microformats were supposed to do. Can everything about microformats be dropped from Wikipedia now? In particular can/should the mentions of microformat in GeoGroup documentation be dropped?

--Doncram (talk,contribs) 20:36, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 12 March 2023 (add gpx)

Hi I have written a GPX exporter on toolforge: geoexport.toolforge.org Currently it doesn't support recursion, but it does support differentiation primary and secondary coordinates. 

|-

|[//geoexport.toolforge.org/gpx?titles={{#if:{{{article|}}}|{{urlencode:{{{articlee|{{{article}}}}}}}}|{{FULLPAGENAMEE}}}}{{#if:{{{level|}}}|&coprimary=primary&l={{urlencode:{{{level|}}}}}}} GPX (primary)]

|-

|[//geoexport.toolforge.org/gpx?titles={{#if:{{{article|}}}|{{urlencode:{{{articlee|{{{article}}}}}}}}|{{FULLPAGENAMEE}}}}{{#if:{{{level|}}}|&coprimary=secondary&l={{urlencode:{{{level|}}}}}}} GPX (secondary)]

|-

|[//geoexport.toolforge.org/gpx?titles={{#if:{{{article|}}}|{{urlencode:{{{articlee|{{{article}}}}}}}}|{{FULLPAGENAMEE}}}}{{#if:{{{level|}}}|&coprimary=all&l={{urlencode:{{{level|}}}}}}} GPX (all)]

Reubot (talk) 12:03, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Your proposed changes to the {{GeoGroup}} template are unclear, editor Reubot – can you place them in the [sandbox]? and perhaps they can be tested? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 20:51, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi, sorry I was unclear - my proposal is to add GPX export into the template using the tool I wrote. I've added my proposal to the sandbox https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:GeoGroup/sandbox&oldid=1144673478
Reubot (talk) 23:50, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Curious as to why my "Save as" screen pops in and asks me if I want to save a file named gpx (no extension) when I click any of the links on the testcases page? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 02:38, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I've updated the scripts to use the titles as filename also the category tests should work now. BTW the source is at https://gitlab.wikimedia.org/toolforge-repos/geoexport Reubot (talk) 12:34, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Okay, that does seem better, so let's see how it flies. And  edited. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 23:18, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, I plan to add more output formats in the future if people are interested. Reubot (talk) 09:35, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
When I run it from an article, it works OK; but run from my sandbox it produces an 'empty' file - ie it has <?xml...><gpt...></gpt>, but no contents within the gpt. Is this correct (if so, why?), an error in the extract, or is my sandbox using it incorrectly? -- Verbarson  talkedits 21:48, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
What's displayed at thousands of articles has changed from a 2-line display "Map all coordinates using: OpenStreetMap" and "Download coordinates as: KML" to a 5-line display adding separate lines for "GPX (primary)" and "GPX (secondary)" and "GPX (all)". This is unacceptable, IMHO. The display now drapes down across section lines or it inserts big white-space rows.
It was bad enough that the option to download coordinates has long been advertised, which I personally have never ever heard of anyone anywhere wanting to do. (I happen to be a longtime editor on lists of historic places, and I just don't happen to know of anyone ever wanting to download coordinates. [Update: now I recall there's a local historical society in California which doesn't like Wikipedia's treatment of historic sites in its area, because Wikipedia editors do not accept that any and every cemetery, no matter how new and useless, is automatically to be deemed historic and Wikipedia-notable...and the editor involved has gone off to program mapping for the historical society's independent webpage... so, they presumably did "download" a few hundred coordinates, one time. Likely not by downloading to "KML", whatever that is, but rather by editing down the source code of several list-articles. Or maybe they got them from Wikidata. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 22:40, 21 March 2023 (UTC)] That seems incompatible with readers reading Wikipedia. Wikipedia is for readers, not, I dunno, startup gaming firms wanting to acquire coordinates to use somehow in a new computer game? Sorry my ignorance is showing, if there do exist any reasons why normal readers would ever, much less frequently, want this. Are gaming firms or whomever among "normal readers", maybe that could be argued?)
Actually Doncram it is quite useful for requested photographs, eg Category:Wikipedia_requested_photographs_in_Queensland . Reubot (talk) 01:41, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, that is interesting. That is an example of GeoGroup being used at a category page. Maybe there should be two versions of GeoGroup, or a switch "category=yes" or whatever, to give different display at a category page vs. regular mainspace article. FWIW, I think what displays at a category page does not need to be as brief and innocuous; a reader who has arrived there has knowingly gone on to choose to visit something which is not simply a regular article.
Also, now I wonder if the dropdown or separate page or whatever could now link to some outside webpage (at toolforge?) which provides a guide on how to use coordinates, e.g. how to download coordinates and use them in some mapping app or whatever you would do with the Queensland coordinates. I personally don't mind there being an external link if it is in a dropdown, i.e. if it is not presented to regular wikipedia readers who have not taken a positive step to go towards taking action on, or getting info about, downloading coordinates. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 21:39, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Anyhow, what needs to be done is to limit the second line to display merely "Download coordinates", with the options to be offered at a longer display that can open up (or at a completely separate webpage that can be opened).
Until that programming is made to work, the recent functionality added should be immediately cancelled by rolling back to the previous version of GeoGroup template. There are millions of readers being offered various options of "GPX" downloading, whatever that is, each hour this has not been fixed. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 22:18, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
As you wish, the edit has been arrow reverted for now. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 00:40, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
Just a little notification to the proposer, editor Reubot. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 00:27, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
I've updated the sandbox to use Template:Collapse. Reubot (talk) 12:47, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
To editors Doncram and Verbarson: do the [testcases] show the needed appearance and functionality, and are your previously expressed issues okay now? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 20:59, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Sorry, no. When I download the KML file, it contains reasonable-looking data for the points (I have not tested its validity). But when I download any of the three GPX files from the first example, I just get this for all three downloads:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<gpx xmlns="http://www.topografix.com/GPX/1/1" >
</gpx>
There is no point data in the file.
I am running Chrome on Lubuntu, but I don't see that this would affect the file contents?
OTOH, the appearance is much better! -- Verbarson  talkedits 21:45, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Verbarson, I've updated the script to now treat non category namespaces the same when parsing an individual page: [1]
I'm not sure how to get a single section using api or DB queury. so it's just all the page coords for now
Reubot (talk) 12:15, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
Well, it has changed the outcome. Using the first GeoGroup in testcases, the GPX (primary coordinates) button still downloads a three-line no-point-data file; but the GPX (secondary coordinates) and GPX (all coordinates) buttons both download 2503-line apparently identical (top and tail look good, I haven't done a complete comparison) files full of point data (again, not validated). I do not know the distinction between primary and secondary coordinates, but this outcome suggests that all the coordinates are secondary? -- Verbarson  talkedits 18:23, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
Primary is a single coordinate for the pages subject (from mw:Extension:GeoData#Glossary):
  • Primary vs. secondary coordinates: primary coordinates define article subject's location, while secondary coordinates are other coordinates mentioned in the article. There can be only one primary coordinate per article, but as many secondaries as you like barring technical restrictions.
Reubot (talk) 00:53, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
That may be a bug. I'll have to look onto it. Reubot (talk) 01:36, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Thank you User:Paine Ellsworth for managing this and User:Reubot for creating the alternative. Yes I see the testcases which look pretty good. I suggest changing the second line from what now comes across as mysterious, calling for the reader to puzzle what the completion of the thought would be, in showing "Download coordinates as:" followed by "[show]". With [material between brackets being a link that can be clicked upon]. The functionality is good, but change the presentation to something like "Download coordinates [here]", or "or download coordinates [here]" or just "[download coordinates]". So the thought is complete, the reader is not puzzled, and the reader if interested in getting all the coordinates can do so. I don't know if template:collapse allows an alternative to the text "show" being what it shows, so perhaps it will require using an adapted version of that template. I don't happen to think of wording right now that really works when the link is going to show "show" (e.g., would "For ways to download coordinates: [show]" is too long, so I think having the link "show" something else is better. Thank you -- Doncram (talk,contribs) 21:41, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Doncram, I've changed the sandbox text to "show links" or it could use "expand". Reubot (talk) 06:01, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
It's clearly better than before. The testcases page is impressively long and sort of interesting, BTW. Offhand I think "expand" might be better. And the original version has a normal or smaller space between its two lines of text, while the current one has an unfortunately large gap between the two lines. I am just one person (the only person?) who had any issue with the version rolled out, and you have considered and made accommodations which I do appreciate. I don't know of any editor review process to fine-tune this. To me, it's okay/good, and I don't want to be holding this up. Thanks! --Doncram (talk,contribs) 03:58, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Since edit requests are only for uncontroversial edits, this request has been deactivated until a consensus agrees that these edits are both ready to go live and are improvements to this template. Please do not reactivate this request until consensus has been achieved. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 20:23, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
How do we reach a consensus? Both user:Doncram and user:Verbarson seem to happy with the changes. Reubot (talk) 23:59, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
I do appreciate that my concern that not much should show in mainspace for most readers was addressed, by creating the dropdown menu.
Now, glancing at the discussion, I do have another question/issue, about what shows within the dropdown (a lesser concern for me): are the three lines for GPX really required (primary vs. secondary vs. all), in addition to the KML line? Why not just one line for GPX? Because in this discussion it was explained that "primary coordinates define article subject's location, while secondary coordinates are other coordinates mentioned in the article." I can't imagine what users just want to download one coordinate, the single primary one. As before, I am ignorant about how downloading is useful for anyone (except that I posed a California group once might have found it useful, one-time only, and I posed that maybe crazy gamer companies might... and Reubot did assert it was useful for identifying photos needed, but I am not familiar with the situation so I haven't really absorbed that). Anyhow, is there any plausible usefulness of offering a download of one data point? A user who needs the primary coordinates can just click on the coordinates, and let the GeoHack come up, and copy-paste the one set of coordinates from there. And wouldn't any user who wants the secondary coordinates also want the primary set? The primary one could probably best be provided as the first set of coordinates in the list, anyhow, and if any user really didn't want that in some gaming(?) programming or other purpose they could program the deletion of the first set. And whatever sophisticated users want just the primary coordinates could likewise just keep the first row and strip away the rest, couldn't they? [Update: I see there might or might not be a primary (a coords with "display=title") in an article, so the first row in a download could not be assumed to be one. Maybe the primary, in first row or not, is identifiable in a different way? --Doncram (talk,contribs) 19:46, 2 July 2023 (UTC) By the way, in the KML download, is the primary set of coordinates given first (or should it be), and why is a primary vs. secondary distinction not offered there?
So it's not a big deal, really, but why not just have one row in the dropdown for KML and one row for GPX, rather than primary, secondary, and total for GPX? Again, take my comments with a grain of salt because I dunno what KML is nor do I know what GPX, much less what downloads of them are useful for. My main concern was that the mainspace regular view not be too long, and that has been addressed. Thanks! --Doncram (talk,contribs) 04:04, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
  1. I must state that I do not use the KML output, nor do I expect to use the GPX output; can we get opinions from readers who use these facilities
  2. I am happy that the new layout, with a drop-down menu, will not disturb the look of existing articles that use GeoGroup
  3. The new layout provides an easy way to add new extracts in the future
  4. I agree with Doncram's point that having primary/secondary/both options is unwieldy (I also wonder what proportion of general readers would understand the distinction without testing it out - I was ignorant of this)
Support with reduction to a single GPX extract of all coords. -- Verbarson  talkedits 18:18, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
I basically want to say go ahead as it is now. I was thinking I don't want to be posing Reubot unnecessary questions or ignorantly posing issues that aren't real, or aren't significant, but also wondering about...
1) at testcases I am getting just the effectively empty three line file

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <gpx xmlns="http://www.topografix.com/GPX/1/1" > </gpx>

in some cases of one or more of the three GPX options (GPX primary, GPX secondary, and GPX all), when I try various testcases, where the KML option yields a download of many coordinates. Not sure if these empties are problems.
(EC) At first here I stated here that I was seeing empty for all three in some cases, which would be problematic, but going back I don't see that, so I revised what I was saying here.
Meanwhile, Verbarson jumped in to say:
Still working for me.
Incidentally, I note that the downloaded KML file is named doc (n).kml, whereas the GPX files are named User_Verbarson_sandbox (n).gpx, (based on the page where I tested them) which seems more useful. Would it be worth putting a better name on the KML files? -- Verbarson  talkedits 19:05, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Specifically in the Examples section, which uses data from Netherton Tunnel Branch Canal, for "Display the coordinates from the current section (in current article) with a maplink map:", the GPX primary option is empty. Hmm, upon review I see that is because the data copied from the article to use in the testcases page is changed for the "Regent Road air vent" (the approximate canal mid-point) so that there is no datum with "display=title" in the section, i.e. it uses
{{coord|52.50697|-2.05708|region:GB_type:landmark|name=Regent Road air vent}}
instead of
|{{Coord|52.50697|-2.05708|display=inline,title|region:GB_type:landmark|name=Regent Road air vent}}
in the Netherton Tunnel Branch Canal article.
I suppose the testcases page, like all other pages, is not allowed to include more than one "primary" (display=title) coordinates. I will believe that the revised template would yield the primary one, when applied on the actual page. So this example is okay.
  • Specifically for the "Display all coordinates in a category:" applied to Category:Rail transport stations in London fare zone 2, the GPX secondary option is empty (and primary and all may both give all of the data). Perhaps "primary" vs. "secondary" always would be meaningless for a category, but if so why offer the three options, rather than just "GPX"? Or, can a category have a primary? My ignorance is showing again probably. Maybe it would be too hard for the GeoGroup to function differently on a category vs. on a regular article page? I did comment before that maybe GeoGroup should be different for categories, and if i recall correctly my reason was that is because what needs to be explained is different. [Update, and this is going off-topic here: I see that the example usage of GeoGroup in a category was using template:howtoreqphotoin, where the call to GeoGroup was with some level of recursion (for searching in how many levels of subcategories) is specified. Let me just observe, I think the documentation for Geogroup about usage in categories is lacking: all that is stated at "Option for categories" section is "There is one optional parameter for display of coordinates in categories: {{GeoGroup|level=0,1,2,3,...}} level= Category recursion level, where 0 means unlimited". Which is opaque to me. Examples would be relevant, such as perhaps discussion of the template:howtoreqphotoin. And there are examples, but they are hidden far down in a subsection labelled "Other examples". The section "Examples" should be split into "Examples for coordinates in articles and sections" vs. "Examples for coordinates in categories" or something like that, instead of being split between "Netherton Tunnel Branch Canal" and "Other examples". --Doncram (talk,contribs) 20:17, 2 July 2023 (UTC)]
2) Before I review much more, Reubot could you reply about when having the primary vs. secondary distinction would be helpful? Now I am gathering that "primary" really means just any coords with "display=title". And in some/many articles that single set of coords would not have a "name=" field identified, while probably all other coords in the article would. This might occur in an article about a historic district where the primary is some central point in the district, and secondaries are locations of specific buildings which the reader would be able to see in the "Show all coordinates in linked OpenStreetMap", perhaps ideally(?) without having the central point show also.
3) Guessing at an application where "primary" might be wanted: Maybe an outside programmer would want to extract just the central points of each of a number of historic district articles, and could somehow apply the "download GPX primary only" option repeatedly (or have some staff person manually apply it repeatedly get a bunch of single-datum files that the programmer would run their program on). In this application, I wonder if the programmer would or could know the difference between the "primary" vs. "secondary" in a downloaded "GPX all" file, and therefore be perfectly happy with that.
4) Note one coordinates row in a GPX file looks like:<wpt lat="52.486" lon="-1.89"> <name>Birmingham</name> <desc>Template:GeoGroup/testcases</desc> <link href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:GeoGroup/testcases" >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:GeoGroup/testcases</link> </wpt>
Could or should the row indicate primary vs. secondary?
Again I am afraid with my questions I am not being helpful. If Reubot, the only person actually understanding about KML and GPX being useful, would say they know that all these questions/potential issues are nonsense, and that the existing new GeoGroup is good as it is, then their word should be accepted.
Again, as a non-user of downloaded coordinates, I am informed enough only about what should display in mainspace for non-users, and the compact display is fine as it is now, so really if Reubot thinks the current drop-down and functionality is good, then that should be accepted. If/when in the future some actual user(s) of downloads identify some issue(s), that's when changes from the existing, functioning GeoGroup sandbox code should be considered. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 19:46, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
Reubot has already explained - see "Primary vs. secondary" above. -- Verbarson  talkedits 21:21, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
Just noticed: when using the section= restriction, the KML extract respects the restriction, but the GPX extract includes all coords in the article. -- Verbarson  talkedits 21:37, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
Unfortunately I am not sure how to access sections via the api. Unlike kmlexport, which parses the whole page as HTML, I use the wikitech:Wiki_Replicas and mw:Extension:GeoData. If anyone knows how to implement this the source is on Gitlab
As a stopgap, perhaps the script should return an error if section if specified?

Reubot (talk) 08:20, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
Rather than an error (which returns no information) how about putting "GPX (all article coords)" on the menu when section= is present? The downloader will get the info, they'll just have to split it from the rest of the article's coords. -- Verbarson  talkedits 09:05, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
Ok, well I'll just leave it, as that what it is essentially doing now.
Also regarding "Support with reduction to a single GPX extract of all coords" , Would you accept a compromise to keep all three types? Perhaps moving "all coords" to the top of the download list?
Reubot (talk) 10:20, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
Fine by me. Since I only use this to open OSM, my opinions on the file downloads should not carry too much weight. Roll it out and see what the response is, and fine tune it later if necessary. -- Verbarson  talkedits 10:29, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi @Paine Ellsworth, is the above conversation enough for consensus?
Reubot (talk) 14:35, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
To editor Reubot: this has been  completed. Please make any necessary changes to the template documentation. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 16:57, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Adding names to the coordinates list

I'm using the template on South Jasper Ranges where I pull the coordinates into the table of mountains using {{wikidata}}:
e.g. {{wikidata | property | page=Mount Edith Cavell | linked | coord}}
That works fine but when I click the OSM link, the coordinates list on the left is showing "#1", "#2", ... "#19" for the labels for each coordinate. If you call {{coord}} directly and pass the name parameter, then OSM will display that name rather than "#1". However, I don't see how can set the coord name when I'm using {{wikidata}} to extract the coordinates. RedWolf (talk) 00:28, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

GeoGroup not working

It times out with an error message starting with "Webservice request timed out". Initially it did it on an article with many coords, but further testings shows it is not working on any article no matter how few coords. Kerry (talk) 01:51, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Antarctica

I have been expanding articles on mountain ranges and major glaciers in Antarctica to include lists of smaller features such as mountains, cliffs and tributary glaciers. The idea is to get rid of trivial little stubs, and put the information they hold into the context of a larger feature. Worcester Range is an example. I usually remember to add {{geogroup}}, which I find helpful to check for anomalies in the coordinates. But at first glance, what displays is just a scatter of pointers on a plain, pale blue background. The reader has to look very carefully to see there are some light grey regions where the mountains are. And they have to zoom in, zoom in further. and zoom in more to find a little red triangle where OpenStreetMap thinks the peak is, and zoom in further again to find the OpenStreetMap name.

Is there any way to add a parameter or parameters to {{GeoGroup}} to ask for greater contrast and more prominent feature symbols and names? Aymatth2 (talk) 14:08, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

What am I missing?

I used the GeoGroup function back when I was sorting Category:Central Province, Sri Lanka geography stubs about a year ago. It was dandy. Now I'd like to use it in some stub categories under Category:Pakistan geography stubs, but when I try to apply {{GeoGroup}} or {{GeoGroupTemplate}} to a category (such as Category:Populated places in Upper Kohistan District), I'm taken to an OSM page that shows "sorry, no data to show". (I get the same result on the categories I previously used it on in Category:Central Province, Sri Lanka geography stubs.) I've tried varying the parameters per the template/doc, to no avail. Is there another setting I need to use, or has the OSM URL in the code changed? Please help. Her Pegship (?) 18:32, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

You don't miss anything, this was a bug over months. --DB111 (talk) 13:11, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

GeoGroup doesn't seem to be working

Clicking on the GeoGroup box in the rendered article isn't launching Open Street Map. However, Open Street Map itself seems to be working as normal. Not sure where to report this problem. Kerry (talk) 02:28, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

OSM4Wiki (the tool behind) isn't maintained very well anymore, so maybe replace (or complement) by WikiMap (which doesn't have "section" support), e.g. https://wikimap.toolforge.org/?lang=en&page=Paris
WikiMap has working "level" support (showing subcategories), broken in osm4wiki for years: {{#if: {{{level|}}}|&subcats=true&subcatdepth={{{level|}}}}} --DB111 (talk) 13:03, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Having GeoGroup not working is quite a big loss. Where should that be reported in the hope that someone can work out a solution? Thanks! Underwaterbuffalo (talk) 14:56, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Unfortunately (resp. with good reason) not everybody could change the template to switch the tool. --DB111 (talk) 16:07, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Replace [https://tools.wmflabs.org/osm4wiki/cgi-bin/wiki/wiki-osm.pl?project=en&article={{urlencode:{{{articlee|{{{article|{{FULLPAGENAMEE}}}}}}}}}}{{#if:{{{section|}}}|&section={{urlencode:{{{section|}}}}}}}{{#if:{{{level|}}}|&l={{urlencode:{{{level|}}}}}}} OpenStreetMap] with
[https://wikimap.toolforge.org/?lang=en&page={{urlencode:{{{articlee|{{{article|{{FULLPAGENAMEE}}}}}}}}}}{{#if:{{{level|}}}|&subcats=true&subcatdepth={{urlencode:{{{level|}}}}}}} OpenStreetMap] --DB111 (talk) 16:19, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
That does not work for me. See https://wikimap.toolforge.org/?lang=en&page=Saint+Johns+Range. But it seems as though GeoGroup works some of the time, just not all the time. Aymatth2 (talk) 17:20, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Geogroup Screenshot from w:en:Saint Johns Range
Now GeoGroup is working. Maybe it is just running on an antique server that cannot handle the load. Aymatth2 (talk) 19:57, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Not working for me. Try it on Indooroopilly, Queensland or [2] Kerry (talk) 23:39, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Now it's working again! Hurrah! Thanks to anyone who helped make it happen! Kerry (talk) 07:24, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Stopped working again. After a long delay, I see "Wikimedia Toolforge Error: Our servers are currently experiencing a technical problem. This is probably temporary and should be fixed soon. Please try again later." Aymatth2 (talk) 15:29, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

The template's feature "Map this section's coordinates using OpenStreetMap" is not working correctly; coordinates are not mapped at all (see Marcos mansions#List of current & former properties owned by the Marcos clan). Please fix it. Thanks. Sanglahi86 (talk) 22:14, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Working for me, using both Chrome and Firefox, on Lubuntu Linux. Works with whole article or single section selection. Tested on List of Isle of Man railway lines and locations. -- Verbarson  talkedits 21:40, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
The Isle of Man railway lines are mapped, but the Marcos mansions coordinates are not. I'm using Chromium on Linux Mint. I cannot identify what is wrong with the coordinates in that article. Sanglahi86 (talk) 10:06, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
I think I've solved it by replacing the ampersand (&) in the section title. Maybe GeoGroup's underlying code is picky about special characters? -- Verbarson  talkedits 14:31, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
GeoGroup generates a URL that includes the section name, with & replaced by %26 (and space replaced by +) apparently following the percent-encoding process (specifically the application/x-www-form-urlencoded variant):
https://osm4wiki.toolforge.org/cgi-bin/wiki/wiki-osm.pl?project=en&article=Marcos_mansions&section=List+of+current+%26+former+properties+owned+by+the+Marcos+clan
(note: this URL will not work since the section has been renamed)
I guess that the code which interprets this URL fails to decode the encoded characters properly. -- Verbarson  talkedits 17:25, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

All GeoGroups are showing the same place in Germany?

Initially I thought I must have made an error entering coordinates in the article I was working on, but it seems every GeoGroup I checked both in Australian articles and beyond is taking the reader to the same map of somewhere in Germany. Not sure if this is our problem or Open Street Maps. Kerry (talk) 02:24, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

I am currently working on OSM4Wiki. Some changes in Wikimedia forced me to activate the new version before it was bug-free. I even asked on several places to test the new version, but there was little feedback. Nobody told me "your tool does not work with GeoGroups". So please be patient. --Plenz (talk) 19:00, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing it! Kerry (talk) 07:55, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:GeoGroup/Archive_2&oldid=1255195178"