Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indian maps/Archive 1

To be decided

Colours to be used for general maps
Naming conventions for file names

=Nichalp «Talk»= 09:35, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requests

I know right now we should be completely focussed on fixing standards, but still I wanted to ask whether we should have a section for map requests on the project page? We have tons of requested maps at WP:HOI. deeptrivia (talk) 13:14, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Once we've finalised the base map, we should open a sub-page for map requests. Otherwise it will be the case of putting the cart before the horse. =Nichalp «Talk»= 20:06, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Map status

This is how it looks like at the momoent, districts to be added to only a few more states.
Unfortunately i wont be able to work on this for another month due to my univ exams followed by a trip to Mumbai ( I will come online tho) . I still have to add the tropic of cancer Nichalp asked me to do. I can add the missing districs when i come back (source).
At the moment the file contains states on different layers and districts on different layers, so a wide variety of options are available to diplay. Just turn off whichever is not needed. Right now the districts are at 70%opacity so you can see the state borders underneath --^{PlaneMad|YakYak} 18:48, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Districts addded to all states. Phew, my eyes can finally take a rest (till july 6). Highlighted TN as an example --^{PlaneMad|YakYak} 17:57, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see anything on the thumbnail version (it's blank.) Only when I fully zoom on the map do I see anything. Is this happening only with me? deeptrivia (talk) 01:47, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happening to me too. =Nichalp «Talk»= 04:29, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be a problem with illustrator created maps, fixed now by clicking the clear cache link on that page--^{PlaneMad|YakYak} 10:15, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IMO, district boundaries should be continued across the LoC for NPOV. e.g., here. This won't mess the map up a lot, I hope. I think it's necessary for NPOV. deeptrivia (talk) 16:56, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What would be the point of including districts that arent under Indian control. and then theres the question of wether the districts are extended ones of the ones under Indian control or the existing districts borders of Pok and Northern territories--^{PlaneMad|YakYak} 09:44, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nichalp, can you tell me what more changes need to be done? i find line borders to be more clearer than dot-dash borders that you suggest --^{PlaneMad|YakYak} 09:44, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The dotted borders halp maintain NPOV. =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:57, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Planemad for your help on Delhi map, I'm going to use your tips soon. Since both countries claim J&K in its entirety, and since these districts existed prior to 1947 (except the carving out of Kargil District), I thought that shouldn't be a problem. Indian sources still draw the original pre-invasion boundaries, e.g., [1], [2], [3], [4]. I have a couple of suggestions: To me it seems the district borders of Assam are darker than other states, so probably that can be fixed. Second, the rivers in Bangladesh suddenly appear from nowhere, which looks a bit odd. Can anything be done about it? Regards, deeptrivia (talk) 12:29, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All those maps seem to be old, the latest one ive managed to find is this (2001) and it doesnt show the extended borders. If you can get an updated map, il draw them. About the rivers,they become so wide in Bangladesh that it cant be ignored [5], but i will reduce the length upto the confluence of the two. Im also thinking of including major rivers and lakes in the map. ^{PlaneMad|YakYak} 09:59, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had seen the census map earlier. In that map, I think they are bound to end the lines (although they leave the border open), because they don't have data available for that region, and they have to shade it as "Data Not Available". Anyway, India's stand on Kashmir hasn't changed through all these times. It's true that Brahmaputra (Jamuna), Padma, etc. are quite wide in Bangladesh. However, I'd say that this map also looks a bit wierd for the same reason, that it abruptly widens the rivers at the borders. Of course, no such sudden transition really occurs, and these rivers widen much earlier (e.g., [6]). Marking rivers throughout India, will be the best solution. deeptrivia (talk) 11:15, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TBD

Anything else to be decided or clarified on the project main page? =Nichalp «Talk»= 20:10, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are all borders black? why not use grey or white for districts. that way it wont be visible in a thumbnail and wil only show up in a bigger version --^{PlaneMad|YakYak} 18:12, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Will it be visible in a larger resolution? =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:53, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One more problem: I thought of using Planemad's map for the locator. But it stops displaying after a purge. I remember he saying that Adobe maps have that problem. Can that be fixed? - Ganeshk (talk) 17:01, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Planemad, could you improve my image (projection etc) while keeping it at the same drawing resolution (6x)? It would be nice to have a featured image across all Indian towns. =Nichalp «Talk»= 17:07, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nichalp, the map i made was from yours. Since the projection had to be changed, i used a map with the best resolution (1996x2384) scaled it to match yours as much as possible and modified the borders. Then i overlayed the state census maps [7] and tried to fit them on the state borders, and then drew the districts. The border accuracy of both maps are essentially the same, the major difference being the projection used.

So why all this fuss about projection? quite simply all available maps on the net use conical projection which is the recomended one, this makes tracing roads and rivers, and marking cities from existing maps much easier. The problem was that Nichalp used the IR map due to its high resolution, but unfortunately was mecrator projected. No other available maps use this projection. But one advantage of using it will be for auto city locator maps which will not work with my map --^{PlaneMad|YakYak} 18:17, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool! Thanks for the explanation. However I'm not satisfied with the status of Kashmir and AP as per the new maps. I feel they are a bit POV. =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:49, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

np, im open to suggestions on the disputed areas. But why exactly is it POV? ^{PlaneMad|YakYak}

Because to accurately represent NPOV, we would need to have four different border styles. 1) Undisputed international boundary. 2) defacto boundary (LoCs) 3) Extent of area claimed by India 4) Extent of area claimed by others. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:14, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

These are the borders used: 1> Solid black, 2> Solid red, 3>Broken black, 4> Broken red ^{PlaneMad|YakYak} 07:50, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One way to fix the thumbnail problem will be to open it up in inkscape and save it again. Anyway i will only work on the main map, so you guys will have to make locator maps etc . i dont have too much badwidth so i dont upload until really needed --^{PlaneMad|YakYak} 18:20, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion of main India map

I'm pleased to see Nichalp's SVG map has come on a long way! May I suggest an improvement? It would be extremely useful to have an India map with Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bhutan on (with relevant subdivisions). Indian culture has greatly influenced these countries and the historical borders of India (or the states that made up India) have changed from time to time. Such an expanded map would be very useful for cultural and historical purposes. Thanks. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 22:41, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naming conventions

proposal:

India_base_map.svg base_map, like a common central database with roads, rail, cities. Not for use in articles

India_map.svg political map with only major roads, cities, important roads.
India_physical_map.png major physical features
India_roadway_map.svg national and state highway map with towns
India_railway_map.svg big task!
India_airway_map.svg air routes

India_<state>_locator_map.svg locator map, with state highlighted. districts not visible but capital marked.
India_<state>_districts_map.svg closeup of state with districts highlighted and capitals marked
India_<state>_map.svg political map of state with roads, rail, important towns, district outlines
India_<state>_physical_map.png physical map showing moutain ranges, rivers, peaks, water bodies.

I suggest uploading non text version on commons and uploading text versions to english wp with same filename --^{PlaneMad|YakYak} 09:43, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The physical map will need to be png. SVG can't handle the information. Information is on the project page. Also I've heard that certain browsers can't handle image filenames with spaces in them. We would need to append hyphens or underscores. =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:03, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

City maps

Here's a blank Delhi map showing state and district borders, rail and DMRC tracks, besides roads, parks etc. What do you guys think of the colour scheme? Light yellow could not be used for territory of primary interest because it makes the white roads almost invisible. Other colours are all the recommended ones. This would probably help up concretize standards for city maps. deeptrivia (talk) 06:14, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're going great guns DT! have you seen this image:

Image:Ph map manila large.png? I like the colour scheme in that. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:21, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great work deeptrivia. I think it is important to decide what and what not to include in city maps. Im sure no ones going to use these map for navigation, so including too many minor roads and details might be a wasted effort--^{PlaneMad|YakYak} 09:35, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Getting borders to coincide

This is an Inkscape question. I've been trying to make the borders between districts (see district map on right) coincident by brute force. It doesn't work well and takes a lot of effort. I'm sure there must be a better way to do this. What should I be doing? deeptrivia (talk) 05:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If inkscape uses a similiar style structure as illustrator this shouldnt be too difficult. What i did for the districts in the india map, was to draw one disrtict over another, with each one having a fill color and a border. So when the areas overlapped, you will see the borders of the district on the higher layer and not the lower one. the principle is to use a higher layer to define the edges of the lower layer instead of shaping them to perfectly fit into each other like a jigsaw --^{PlaneMad|YakYak} 09:35, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like fitting it as a jigsaw puzzle. It makes the map more complete and accurate, although it's harder work. =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:55, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, that's done. The map still doesn't look very neat. What changes can I make? deeptrivia (talk) 02:30, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Try increasing the brightness of the roads. =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:55, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, the roads are now as bright as they can be. deeptrivia (talk) 02:47, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can the different area names be clickable like in the discussion below. - Ganeshk (talk) 16:54, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clickable maps

Please see this discussion. - Ganeshk (talk) 20:42, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, I noticed it on the Football WC page last week. I've also seen the same in the Serbia article. =Nichalp «Talk»= 04:27, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Locator map

Crosspost from Nichalp's talk page: Good news. I finally found a solution for the locator. I saw this dicussion and found this. This template picks up lat and long values and places a locator dot. It is pretty cool. No calculation required. I used that template with the India map. Can you please take a look at this page and let me know if the cities are fairly accurate? - Ganeshk (talk) 15:57, 23 June 2006 (UTC) Example: {{Location map|India|float=none|label=Chennai|lat=13.09|long=80.27|position=right}} produces:[reply]

Chennai

Chennai (India)

- Ganeshk (talk) 16:02, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, it looks accurate to me. Can anything be done about the overlapping text? =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:32, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The position flag can be used to set the label to left or right. Please take a look at the page again and check if the overlap was fixed. - Ganeshk (talk) 17:04, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have used the new locator map on Machilipatnam. Please check and comment. - Ganeshk (talk) 23:15, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you check Hyderabad? I think we should go live with this now. =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:00, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do I check? - Ganeshk (talk) 15:25, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have added autolocator to Hyderabad (India) too. Please check. - Ganeshk (talk) 15:35, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect. Good job Ganesh! =Nichalp «Talk»= 17:43, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Roadway map

Made from a comprehensive list of highways [8], i had to exclude a few ( 103-107) cause i couldnt find its exact route. If you open the svg file, all the paths have been named according to its number, eg "nh4".
Also marked the gq and nsew routes and major cities. Finished marking important cities and tourist towns for Kerala and TN. Notice that rivers have been drawn. ^{PlaneMad|YakYak} 19:45, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! This is fantabulous. Great work, Planemed! deeptrivia (talk) 04:24, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed areas colours

I'm unhappy with the hashed lines used to mark the disputed areas on the map. When the image is thumbed, the hashes are hardly discernable. Could it be reverted back using the two separate colours? =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple location clickable map

We need a infobox/template to superimpose clickable city names over the locator map. See the following example:

Novi Sad

Belgrade

Kragujevac

Niš

Kosovska Mitrovica/Mitrovicë

Pirot

Peć/Pejë

Priština/Prishtinë

Prizren/Prizreni

Template:Infobox Indian Jurisdiction has superimposition information, so the process should be somewhat easier. Here are the input parameters:

latd1, latd2, location_name1, name_position (right/left)

The output should be a red dot and the corresponding wikitext on the svg map. =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:17, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template

How about creating a template to be added to maps under this project? --^{PlaneMad|YakYak} 16:25, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

see commons:Template:WikiProject India Maps --^{PlaneMad|YakYak} 17:53, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Simplified disputed areas

Indicating the disputed areas was an eyesore in my previous map because it tends to clash with information on the map itself such as roads etc. After a bit of experimentation i settled on the scheme shown on this map . Why?

It clearly shows territory under Indian adinistration and foreign control using one shade for each
It shows disputed LoC between India and Pak
It shows the area that is claimed by India.
It does not show the area claimed by Pak or China, as someone who views a non political map is not intrested in such information.
Disputed borders along Uttaranchal and HP have been excluded as these are very minor areas.
From the map, one can establish the frontiers which are disputed and establish weather an area is under Indian or Foreign control.
What it does not show is the exact area of the disputed region, which really is unnecessary information for a non political map.

I find this to be the simplest base map with least NPOV issues and sufficient for making informative and thematic maps like i did before [9]. Im open to suggestions but i strictly oppose using more than two shading colors as it will conflict with thematic maps. If nobody has issues with this, i can go ahead and start churning out maps --^{PlaneMad|YakYak} 19:34, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, we would have to show different borders and shading for claimed areas. It otherwise, does not adhere to the Neutral Point of view, which is non-negotiable as decreed by Jimbo. A small price to pay for accurate maps. =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:39, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Planemad, Your striving for a definitive map is admirable, and the idea is a good one, of depicting "areas controlled" as per your point-1. It could work, but then one must be consistent. Just as the border claimed by India is shown all around, so must borders claimed by our neighbours be shown, not only in J&K but also in Arunachal Pradesh and the middle sector. In short, I cannot comprehend point-4, and IMHO, Point-5 (and its corollary, point-7) is unnecessarily subjective; these points tend to undermines the raison d'etre of this entire exercise. Addressing these points would, I think, remove the substantive lacunae in the map. I greatly like the new colour coding! Much preferable to last time, where the dispute overwhelmed the map. Regards, ImpuMozhi 03:55, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The point is that this map will be used for making maps similiar to those found here. Since data for thematic maps needs to be represented by different shades. Using additional shading to represent disputed areas claimed by other countries defeats the purpose of the map. Someone who wants to know the population density of states isnt intrested in diputed areas, for which he can look at Nichalp's map or my previous map which demarcates them very clealrly.

Please note that this is not a replacement for Nichalps map, but is meant to be a simplified version without flooding it with details of each and every disputed area. IMO calling this map non neutral is unfair because:

Omission of minor border disputes: After a lot of searching i have come across only one map CIA(1988) which identifies these areas. Although i regard the CIA as a reputable source, there seems to be lack of verifiable textual information on the history behind the dispute and its current status. Take a look at this paper(1984)Globalsecurity.org, it makes no mention of these areas. Too trivial to be included in the map IMHO.
Omission of extents of foreign claim: This has been done because it is impossible to indicate this without using different shades. Moreover this shading will have to be over Indian territory (Kashmir and Arunachal Pradesh) and would effectively highlight them and hence confuse the viewer. Even worse is the fact that this cant be done without mentioning who stakes the claim (wether Pak or China) and thereby requiring four different shades as in Nichalps map. Once again, i feel that when someone needs so much information on disputed areas, he should be directed to a special map for this purpose.
A comprehensive(needs improvement) note has been made regarding disputed areas on the map page which has been written according to a neutral viewpoint

To summarize, i feel this map is neutral enough for its intended use for updates to these maps ^{PlaneMad|YakYak} 17:16, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Issue at Talk:India

Hi guys, your comments are needed here -- Lost ^(talk) 20:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Punjab Map

Something struck me today about the Punjab map. There doesn't appear to be 19 districts on it as written on Districts of Punjab (India). There are only 17 on the map as far as I can tell (it appears to be 18 but Kapurthala District is split into two). So that means at least two districts are missing! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 19:38, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sukh, no need to panic. the map was made from the census site which is 2001 data. Its possible that new districts may have cropped up after that which arent in the map. Tarn Taran and Mohali are the missing ones -^{PlaneMad|YakYak} 17:37, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sas nagar, earlier known as mohali was made a district in 2008

4 color maps - new colors

File:India Tamil Nadu districts map.svg

After some experimentation, this combination seems pleasing to the eye, all are light shades and can be distinguished easily.

Hex	RGB	Used for
#C1E8FB	193,232,251	Colour 1
#F4DFEC	244,223,236	Colour 2
#C6E3C3	198,227,195	Colour 3
#FFEABF	255,234,191	Colour 4

It looks good, but I think it needs some more contrast. From the Wikipedia map talk page archives, the colours should be be easily distinguished by those who are visually-challenged. There's a test for this: Upload your image to http://www.vischeck.com/vischeck/vischeckImage.php. I suggest the contrasts be further refined (orange colour for district for example) =Nichalp «Talk»= 11:27, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

West Bengal map

The map of West Bengal — Image:India West Bengal locator map.svg is not correct as it does not depict the districts of East Midnapur and West Midnapur, rather depicts one Midnapur district (as of 2001). Could anyone help to develope the proper map?

I have not been able to find out a map in the web depicting the two districts seperately. However, I found out a way to developr a proper map. Please see this map. Now go to this website, and download "List of AC Name" from "Download data". An excel file will be downloaded listing all the assembly constituencies with their districts. From this data and the map, a map showing east and west Midnapur can be developed. What do you people think? Please help. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 16:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

West Bengal map: update and request

A correct png map of West Bengal is now available, Image:WestBengalDistrictscurrent.png. Can anyone help render the West Bengal locator map correctly using the png image as guide? Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 15:42, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Project banner

I added a Image-class to the project banner. On talk-pages of Images, the following can be added, {{WP India|class=Image|maps=yes}}. It will produce:

and the images will categorizied under Category:Image-Class India articles. Please add the banner to the talk pages of all India-related map images. -- Ganeshk (talk) 16:37, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added a maps=yes option to the banner to categorize images related to this project under Category:WikiProject Indian maps articles. It also shows that the image is supported by this project. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 07:27, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested Maps

Just chanced upon this category containing articles requesting maps : Category:Wikipedia requested maps in India. Thought I'd bring it to the attention of the cartography dept.--thunderboltz ^(Deepu) 17:13, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Project directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 15:15, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for map

Hello all. I am working on an article titled Satellite Instructional Television Experiment. There are almost no free images available for use in the article. So the only substitute is good maps. While researching I came across this UN report. There is a very illustrative map on Pg. 15 of the report. I would be grateful to anyone who can create a map like that for the article. Regards, - Aksi_great (talk) 10:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like a large pdf. Could you crop the image from the pdf and upload it here? I'll delete it once I have it on my local machine. =Nichalp «Talk»= 13:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Map uploaded here. Thanks - Aksi_great (talk) 08:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Map done: Image:SITE-map-locations.svg. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 07:58, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Map Request

A request from WP:HOI. I think a map showing various parties of the Revolt of 1857 will add a lot of clarity to the article. The map could be based on http://www.history.upenn.edu/coursepages/hist086/material/schmidt38a.jpg. Thanks, deeptrivia (talk) 08:04, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That map isn't very good to work with. 1. The map is inaccurate, doesn't scale well to superimpose it on the SVG blank templates we have. 2. References to the present borders of are absent. Without these markers, it would be difficult to draw the territories accurately. Is there a better map available? =Nichalp «Talk»= 08:15, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

see Image:Indian revolt of 1857 states map.svg--^{PlaneMad|YakYak} 18:49, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 20:36, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]