Commons:Graphic Lab/Map workshop

Illustration Workshop

Map Workshop

Photography Workshop

Video and Sound Workshop

Skip to bottom | Skip to table of contents

Map workshop

This workshop is part of the Graphics Lab, a project aimed at picture retouching to improve the graphical content of the Wikimedia projects. More information about the lab can be found on its main page and requests pages (Illustrations ; Photographs ; Maps ; Video and Sound). To ask questions or make a suggestions, see the talk page of the graphic lab page.

This specific page is the requests page for the Map Workshop. Anyone can make a request for a map to be created or improved. The standard format for making a request is shown below, along with general advice, and should be followed.

Make a request

Use the following template when making a new request, replacing the examples with your image(s) and request(s):

<gallery>
 IMAGENAME.EXT|Description of image
 IMAGE#TWO.EXT|2nd image (If there is one)
 ETCETCETC.EXT|Don't request too many at once, though
</gallery>

;Request:
: Details of your request go here… --~~~~
;Graphist opinion(s):

▶

Make a new request

◀

Blank svg map of districts of Turkey[edit]

IMAGE1.EXT

File:Turkey districts blank.svg

Article(s): en:Turkey_districts_blank.svg

Request: A blank svg map of Turkey on district level (similar to the [1]). The only district map of Turkey on Wikipedia is this[2], which is a png map.

Graphist opinion(s)

Map of the 4th Ukrainian Front advance during the Nikopol–Krivoi Rog Offensive 1 to 8 February 1944[edit]

4th Ukrainian Front situation map 1 to 8 February 1944 northern half.jpg

Source map

Article(s): en:Nikopol–Krivoi Rog Offensive

Request: I would like an English version of the map using NATO military symbology. Additionally this will serve as a replacement for the original file which could be deleted as not public domain. I will provide translations and help with what symbols should be used to graphist. OpenStreetMap can be used for the source terrain. --Kges1901 (talk) 22:38, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Graphist opinion(s)

@Kges1901: I could help you but first I would like to know what kind of map you want, example a topographic like the first one or other? Please ping me, thanks--Goran tek-en (talk) 16:08, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: I would like a political-style map that shows terrain features as elevations are not shown in the source map. Thanks, Kges1901 (talk) 16:15, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@Kges1901: I'm sorry but I don't understand, if there is elevations and terrain to me that is a topographic map like this.

If that is not what you mean please link to a map of the kind you mean.
I can't see/understand which part the original map is of the source map, remember I know nothing of this subject. Please provide screen print with a rectangle on it (or some other way) showing the area you want, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 17:43, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Request taken by Goran tek-en (talk) 17:43, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Extended content

@Goran tek-en: I would like all of the map (the entire map) that is linked. Apologies if I wasn't clear, a topographic map is suitable. Kges1901 (talk) 18:10, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Is this the correct area?, and at OSM there are 4 different types of map, which do you mean? --Goran tek-en (talk) 12:02, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: I would like a standard map. here is the link to the square I drew with google maps that provides the area I would like to be on the map. Kges1901 (talk) 14:15, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Thanks for that square it helped me a lot. Have a look this #1 draft. This is how it looks straight of, don't think about things sticking out or so right now. This is a moderna/today map with streets and other things, do you want me to remove something or add something, feedback, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 15:45, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: The map is excellent, but the area has changed significantly between today and 1944. You should use File:4th Ukrainian Front situation map 1 to 8 February 1944 northern half.jpg's placement of bodies of water and compare it with the OSM map to obtain the 1944 location of the bodies of waters. Otherwise, the roads are generally in the same places now as they were in 1944. Kges1901 (talk) 16:26, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Is it correct that the water bodies was much more narrow/smaller and there where wetlands on the sides 1944? I want to know for sure because there is some work with that and the source map is not that clear, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 17:43, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: Yes, the water bodies were smaller and narrower in 1944, and there were wetlands. Kges1901 (talk) 17:45, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

@Kges1901: When we graphic workers draw maps we try to follow those map conventions so that we have some similarity between the maps. I have now a new #2 draft for you to look at. It doesn't look like the OSM map because of the conventions I mentioned. Really there is nothing left of the OSM map, too much had changed. This is not the final version by far, and I have had to guess quite a bit as I don't really know what everything is on the source map. I would like to get the overall background more lively but I really don't know what it is. Is it fields, sand or what. You tell what you want it to show, give me feedback on the hole map. Any feedback goes, just tell me, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 19:27, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: The area that isn't built up or wetlands is steppe. I have added the place names I would like added to the map here (pardon the shifting of the background, that was accidental) The places with place names on them that you have in green are actually also settlements. Kges1901 (talk) 21:30, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Was the steppe at that time divided into rectangular "fields" as it is on the OSM map of today, it actually looks like that on your linked source? --Goran tek-en (talk) 16:11, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

{{ping|Goran tek-en}] It was indeed divided into fields. Kges1901 (talk) 17:15, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Two different drafts for you;

Spelling draft, this si for you to check the spelling as some were hard to see, also check if any more green areas should be settlements. The names are not in the final position or anything like that.
#3 draft, now there is a stepp background also, check everything and give me feedback, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 18:50, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: Spelling corrections: Apostolov to Apostolovo, missing Malaya Lepetikha (east of the Dnieper, north of Velikaya Lepetikha) and Alekseyevka (north of Kapulovka), Nizhinye Rogachuk to Nizhnye Rogachuk, Pervemayevka to Pervomayeka, Ustikalka to Ushkalka, Manovone to Ivanovonoye, Blagovesh... to Blagoveshchenskoye, Batki to Balki, Menchikor to Menchikur, Peskochina to Peskochino, Alekseyevika to Alekseyevka, Verkooe Tarasovki to Verkhne Tarasovka, imen Chkalova to imeni Chkalova, Grushovka balka to Grushevka balka. The only thing that should be inhabited instead of green is Balki. Kges1901 (talk) 22:51, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Two different drafts for you;

Spelling draft #2.
#4 draft. Is there more on the base map or should we start with the battle now, if so what? --Goran tek-en (talk) 16:03, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: The base map is ok now. Troop positions can be started on now. Germans can be blue, Soviets red. For the map legend (key), the scale of the source map that I linked is 1:100000 or 1 cm of the source map is equal to 1 km. In the key, you can decide what colors represent troop positions on a given day. In the key, note that positions are at 07:00 on each day. In the source map, the key is in the top right corner. For instance, the first color to the right of "к 7.00-1-2-44 г" represents the troop positions of Soviet troops for 1 February 1944, and so on. Kges1901 (talk) 23:03, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

@Kges1901: There are so many different types of encircled areas, lines, squares etc and to me it's very hard to understand which type that shows what. Troop positions, battle lines, movements etc. It would help me a lot if you could mark out the different types and describe them on the map, hope that's OK, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 18:16, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: Here is a key to the symbols. [3]. Thanks, Kges1901 (talk) 00:38, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Day 1[edit]

@Kges1901: I do have problems to interpret the map so now I will give you 10 different drafts to check. What I want is to get all the different areas, lines etc correct before we start giving them the final look. The numbers below are the different days.

blue german
red russian
1 russian
2 russian
3 russian
4 russian
5 russian
6 russian
7 russian
8 russian --Goran tek-en (talk) 16:50, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: Here is a link with captions for the German unit positions on the first day. Kges1901 (talk) 23:56, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

@Kges1901: This is a template that we use when we do military maps File:Template_of_Military_Symbols.svg, is those the symbols you want? If so you have to help me which I should use where.

Two different versions of drafts; 1G without gradient, 1G gradient. Do you want the units names like that? This is going to be really really complicated with all eight days on the same map. For my sake (no knowledge of those battles) it would be very good if we can take it day by day and then we look at the whole info and see what we can do, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 18:18, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: I agree with you about taking it day by day, so first I will upload a version that has the first day's German positions complete. (Here) The symbols I want are the ones on the chart you linked. I would like the map without gradient, because the regiments should be displayed using the "III" regiment unit size symbol with, for instance, for the 570th IR, 570 to the left of the box and the division number, 302, in this case, to the right. For the HQ locations, you don't need the text HQ to the right of the box because anything with the vertical line coming out of it is automatically an HQ per your symbology. Also, there should be no 'x' over Schorner and the HQ in Dudchino is a corps HQ so use 3 'x's as shown in the unit size chart. Kges1901 (talk) 19:49, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

@Kges1901: German day 1.

I have assumed that the brown lines are Geman but I'm not sure.
I have put small dots at the ends of the lines, it's much easier to understand where the start and end. --Goran tek-en (talk) 16:37, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: Almost there with the Germans for Day 1. Only thing now is to change the number of 'x's above IV Army Corps to three 'x's - XXX as it is a corps. Kges1901 (talk) 17:26, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

@Kges1901: German day 1 #2. --Goran tek-en (talk) 18:53, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: Here is a link showing the numbers that should be added for each German divisions. Attached is a link to the original map with the 1st day positions of Soviet units marked in. [4] Kges1901 (talk) 17:19, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Day 1 German Russian. I don't know how to mark when it's two units, tell me. I don't know all of the abbreviations you use so if you can write it in full ones. If you can write text for German and then Russian on separate maps it would be great for me, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 19:42, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: For two regiments you could put two regiment symbols next to each other and have the division numbers to the right of the box. RD = Rifle Division, RC = Corps. Rifle units are infantry. Units marked 'Guards' should have the abbreviation 'Gds' under the number. Kges1901 (talk) 21:44, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

@Kges1901:

What is GRD, and what symbol and unit type?
Within the green line on the draft, where should "Soviet 50th GRD" be, which line, area or what?
Day 1 German Russian-2. --Goran tek-en (talk) 15:06, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en:

Guards Rifle Division - division - XX - infantry, use abbreviation 'Gds' below unit designation number to the left of the box
Lower right of your greeen-circled area Kges1901 (talk) 21:27, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Day 1 German Russian-3. --Goran tek-en (talk) 16:00, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
@Goran tek-en: Excellent work. Comments for Soviet units: the 416th Rifle Division should be marked as infantry - you have used the mechanized infantry symbol there. The 50th Guards should also be north of the 416th. 34th Rifle Corps should have 'Gds' below the '34', and three 'X's instead of four 'x's. 32nd Rifle Corps should have three 'X's instead of four 'x's. 3rd Army (4 X's) should have 'Gds' below the '3'. Thanks, Kges1901 (talk) 23:35, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Day 1 German Russian-4.

To me 416th Rifle Division is marked as infantry, I have encircled it with a green line on this draft.
I know the 50th Guards should be more to the north, I did draw a grey line to show this but that was not really clear. I have now moved around the units to make more room. This means some of them interfere with blue lines and almost other units lines. If this is OK for you I will leave it like that, tell me.
34th etc, this is were I don't have enough knowledge about how to show things. I assumed as there is a difference between units and HQ this also was valid for GDS. You have to help me with stuff like that and be a bit more specific, "both units and HQ" like that. I have never used those military symbols to this extent before so you have to help me.
32 HQ, is it OK to have the vertical line upwards like this, not much space there? --Goran tek-en (talk) 16:36, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: For the 32 HQ, could you decrease the size of the symbol instead? I'd rather that the symbols be slightly smaller than one of them have to be upside down. Kges1901 (talk) 12:39, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Day 1 German Russian-5.

Smaller HQ symbols. You didn't answer my other questions above. --Goran tek-en (talk) 17:54, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en:

The HQ symbols look much better now, thanks.

Apologies for my delayed responses. It's ok if the unit symbols overlap lines.

'GDS', the abbreviation for a Guards unit, should be standardized to 'Gds' - same for both units and headquarters. Other changes:

The HQ '5' infantry box and 'XXXX' should be '5 Shock' infantry box and 'XXXX'
The HQ '10' infantry box and 'XXX' should be '10 Gds' infantry box and 'XXX'
The HQ '9' infantry box and 'XXX' that is southeast of the 108 Gds should be '37' infantry box and 'XXX'
The HQ '3' infantry box and 'I' should be '3 Gds' infantry box and 'XXX'
The '96' infantry box and 'XX' should be '96 Gds' infantry box and 'XXX'
The '108 Gds' are a special case here - the place where they have 2 regiments (III) is at the beginning of the day, and there is a third regiment (III) moving up to the southeast, denoted with an arrow on the source map. The position with the dashed lines for the 108 Gds is the entire division (XX) at the end of the day. To show this situation, suggest drawing in the third regiment (III, infantry box symbol, and 108 Gds to the right of the box) at the beginning of the day with the box at the position shown in the source map, then with arrow heading towards the two regiments of the 108 Gds in the solid circled area on the source map. The two regiments should be shown by side by side boxes that each have III, infantry box, and 108 Gds to the right of the individual boxes. To show the position of the entire division at the end of the day (dashed circle area on source map), draw arrow from the 2 regiments position to the end of day position to show the movement, and keep the symbol you already have at the end of day position there. Kges1901 (talk) 18:30, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Day 1 German Russian-6.

Thank you for making the information structured, much easier for me.
I have also changed the line around the end position to another type, then we can show in the legend that this is at the end of the day. This is just a proposal, if you don't want it, just tell me. --Goran tek-en (talk) 20:39, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: Some final comments on this day, before we move on to the next:

Your proposed change to the legend makes sense.
63, Infantry box, XXXX should be 63, Infantry box, XXX
The '259', Infantry box, XX that is to the northeast of the 32, infantry box, XXX and to the northwest of 34 Gds, Infantry box, XXX should be III, infantry box, and '259' to the right of the box
The '59 Gds', Infantry box, III should have '59 Gds' on the right rather than the left of the box
The '18', Infantry, XX should be '118', Infantry, XX
The '2', Infantry, XXX should be '2 Gds', the Mechanised Infantry symbol in the template of military symbols, and XXX
The II, infantry box, and '61' to the right should be III, infantry box, and '61' to the right
The II, infantry box below that should be III, infantry box, and '61' to the right
The '230' infantry, XX that is next to the headquarters of '9', 'XXX' and infantry box should be infantry, III, and '230' to the right of the box. Kges1901 (talk) 13:49, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Day 1 German Russian-7.

Now I have added the different names and a legend. You should check the names as I'm not sure for all of them. As you can see there is a lot of information just for the 1st of Feb. I think it will be hard to have all of the days in the same map, probably we have to make different ones... We will continue and then we will see. Goran tek-en (talk) 17:55, 26 December 2018 (UTC)--

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
@Goran tek-en: Thanks. Two final comments:

In the legend, change 'Russian' to 'Soviet'
For the 259th, I meant for my comment to apply to the other one. The '259' and 'XXX' should be changed to 'III', infantry box, '259' to the right of the box. The one that is currently 'III', infantry box, '259' should be 259, infantry box, 'XX'
All of the German units with the 'II' unit size symbol should have that changed to 'III' Kges1901 (talk) 22:47, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Day 1 German Soviet-8. --Goran tek-en (talk) 14:44, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: Thanks. One last change: '259' should go to the left of the infantry box for the '259', infantry box, size symbol XX Kges1901 (talk) 14:46, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Day 1 German Soviet-9. --Goran tek-en (talk) 15:43, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Day 2[edit]

@Goran tek-en: There isn't much change for Day 2. Here's an image showing new unit positions. Kges1901 (talk) 01:35, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Draft D2_G_S.svg. I'm not sure how we are going to show the different movements per day. Right now I do one new map/day as it will be to messy to have everything on one, how do you think about this?

Now some of the Soviet lines cross over German so I guess they should be drawn back but you have to tell me what/how. Also check the legend as this is for 2/2. --Goran tek-en (talk) 18:12, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: We could do separate maps for each day's positions, and have them combined into one gif for the article. The German lines should be drawn back to reflect the Soviet advance, as shown on the original map.

The XX, 108 Gds can be shown at the final 1 February position for the second day, as we don't need the first day beginning positions on the second day map. Accordingly, the legend should be changed to remove the end of day symbol. Kges1901 (talk) 23:36, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Draft 4th Ukrainian Front_D-2-2.svg. Day 1 the German lines were brown with blue behind to the weast/north, if there are lines for day 2 you have to show me them, I can't see any. I will right now just move the German troops and you will have to inform me. --Goran tek-en (talk) 15:50, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: There are no German lines for several of the days. For the purposes of the map we'll just assume that the German positions are opposite of the new Soviet positions. Kges1901 (talk) 19:15, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Thanks, so what about my draft above? --Goran tek-en (talk) 17:48, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: The map is fine except that the icons marking the day 1 positions of the units that moved on day 2 (2 Gds, XXX, Mechanized and 50 Gds, XX, Infantry) should be removed.

The 'start of day 1 Feb' in the legend should be changed to 'start of day 2 Feb'. Thanks, Kges1901 (talk) 11:48, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Now I don't understand because in the image you linked to "Here's" there are 2 of each of those . So which is correct, your image or what you tell me now? --Goran tek-en (talk) 16:29, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: I have reconsidered my original opinion has having two identifical symbols for the same unit would be confusing. As a result the southernmost of the 2 Gds, XXX, Mechanized symbols should be removed. Kges1901 (talk) 02:15, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Draft 4th Ukrainian Front_D-2-3.svg. I just wanted to make sure I didn't do unnecessary work.

I did remove "2 Gds, XXX, Mechanized and 50 Gds, XX, Infantry" as you wrote that before and that made most sense to me, if not correct just tell me. I also made a change in the legend so the dates are in the same style. --Goran tek-en (talk) 12:35, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: Your change with the extra box makes sense. Dates should be in the style '2 Feb. 1944'. I think we can move on to the third day after this. Thanks, Kges1901 (talk) 13:07, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Day 3[edit]

@Kges1901: Give me info. --Goran tek-en (talk) 18:27, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: Apologies for the delay. Here is the link with units whose positions changed by 07:00 on 3 February shown. [5]. Kges1901 (talk) 13:00, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Draft 4th_Ukrainian_Front_D-3-1. --Goran tek-en (talk) 18:51, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en:

The map is missing the 54th Guards Rifle Division (54, infantry, XX) shown on the original and its subunits, which should be added.
The (248, infantry, XX) position from 1 Feb should be removed as redundant.

Kges1901 (talk) 18:54, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Draft 4th_Ukrainian_Front_D-3-1. --Goran tek-en (talk) 17:58, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: The subunits of (54, infantry, XX) as annotated on the original map should be shown, otherwise there will appear to be an empty area. Kges1901 (talk) 01:07, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: I'm sorry I don't understand. For me the base reference we have is Day 1. You are talking about original map but as I have tried to inform you, it's to complex for me to understand completely.

Comparison day 2 and 2.

Day 3: Added 416, moved 248 and removed it's previous line.
Day 3: Moved 54, 50.
So what you mean by sub units I don't understand. --Goran tek-en (talk) 11:51, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
@Goran tek-en: Apologies for being unclear, but what I meant was the units marked in this image such as "Training (on left of box), II, Infantry, 54 Gds on right of box" and "Penal (on left of box), I, infantry, 54 Gds (on right of box)". Thanks, Kges1901 (talk) 01:47, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Draft 4th_Ukrainian_Front_D-3-3.

I don't know if sub units should be depicted in a special way.
I might have to many units there now, just tell me.
When you write info for me on the original map please don't write the smallest that smal. Can be hard to read depending on the background, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 16:13, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: The symbols are correct. Comments:

Here is a zoomed-in version of the crowded area with the unit that was invisible on the larger scale version; 2 (on left), II, tank, 37 Gds marked in turquoise should be added.
The front line is marked by the forward most (westernmost or leftmost) lines that are brown on the outside and blue on the inside. The outer most icons (1, II, tank, 37 Gds), (3, II, mechanized, 6 Gds), (2, II, mechanized, 6 Gds)) need to be moved east (right) to reflect that, bringing them closer to Konstantinovka (Константиновка in the screenshot linked in the first bullet point).
If the above – showing the units with the size symbol II – cannot be done in the limited space available, I suggest that you create an inset map that shows a magnification of the "crowded" area in the upper left corner titled 'Frontline of the 2nd Guards Mechanized Corps at 07:00', then add the subunits of 2 Gds, XXX, Mechanized (what I mean by this is ((1, II, tank, 37 Gds), (3, II, mechanized, 6 Gds), (2, II mechanized, 6 Gds), (1, II, mechanized, 6 Gds), and (2, II, tank, 37 Gds)) there. The inset map would not have to include the (2 Gds, XXX, Mechanized) symbol.
If an inset map is created, the front line should still be close to Konstantinovka, but (1, II, tank, 37 Gds), (3, II, mechanized, 6 Gds), (2, II, mechanized, 6 Gds), and (2 (on left), II, tank, 37 Gds) do not need to be shown in the "crowded" area, and (2 Gds, XXX, Mechanized) should be moved forward to the point that is slightly northeast of Konstantinovka where the map in the zoomed-in version says '2 МК' in red letters.
Add "(-)" below 2 Gds in the symbol for (2 Gds, XXX, Mechanized).
Add "(-)" below 54 Gds in the symbol for (54 Gds, XX, Infantry).

After these are addressed 3 February will be done. Thanks, Kges1901 (talk) 00:29, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Draft 4th_Ukrainian_Front_D-3-4.

That was a tuff one, hope I got it all right.
I looked more for the brown/blue lines so I have adjusted others also, so check that area all together. --Goran tek-en (talk) 19:20, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: It is satisfactory, we can move on now. Kges1901 (talk) 03:25, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Day 4[edit]

@Kges1901: I will wait for your info on day 4. --Goran tek-en (talk) 12:33, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: Northern portion of front, east of Dneprovka and Konstantinovka area Kges1901 (talk) 13:26, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Do you have any info on the German forces on the northern portion? I will adjust the german lines but should I just move the different forces also or should some of them be removed? --Goran tek-en (talk) 14:47, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: The German forces can be moved back with the lines. Kges1901 (talk) 14:51, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Day4-1. --Goran tek-en (talk) 13:25, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: Comments:

Remove the large HQ marker for German 302, Infantry, XX and 3, Infantry, XX
A unit symbol for German 302, Infantry, XX should be placed to the west of the units with size marker III and 302 to the right of the infantry symbol
A unit symbol for German 3, Infantry, XX should be placed to the west of the units with size marker III and 3 to the right of the infantry symbol
Shift the German units to the north of the 302, Infantry, XX HQ marker to the south, so that 138, III, Infantry, 3 on right is northeast of 144, III, Infantry, 3 on right
572, III, Infantry, 302 on right should be to the north of 138, III, Infantry, 3 on right
To the north of 572, III, Infantry, 302 on right should be 571, III, Infantry, 302 and 570, III, Infantry, 302 in that order Kges1901 (talk) 23:28, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Day4-2. I didn't understand all of it. Goran tek-en (talk) 14:21, 22 February 2019 (UTC)--

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
@Goran tek-en: It turned out correctly. One last change: add the unit marked in black text. Thanks, Kges1901 (talk) 00:34, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Day4-3. --Goran tek-en (talk) 11:05, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: One last comment: The position and unit symbol for 279, XX, Infantry at Balki can be removed. Thanks, Kges1901 (talk) 03:01, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Day4-4. --Goran tek-en (talk) 12:10, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
@Goran tek-en: I noticed my own error that needs to be corrected: II, Infantry, 54 Gds (on right) should be III, Infantry, 54 Gds (on right). Kges1901 (talk) 22:34, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Day4-5. --Goran tek-en (talk) 10:45, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: 5 Gds (Mechanized, X) should be using the File:NATO Map Symbol - Motorised Infantry.svg symbol instead. Kges1901 (talk) 19:01, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Day 5[edit]

Konstantinovka sector, Dneprovka sector, Veseloye sector - Soviet positions marked by blue lines with red borders Kges1901 (talk) 19:01, 21 March 2019 (UTC) @Kges1901: Day5-1. --Goran tek-en (talk) 15:48, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: In the Konstantinovka sector:

2 Gds (-), XXX, Mechanized should be 2 Gds, XXX, Mechanized
Remove Training, II, Infantry, 54 Gds
Remove Penal, I, Infantry, 54 Gds
Remove 4 Gds, X, Mechanized and arrow
Remove 5 Gds, X, Mechanized and arrow
Remove the dotted line circle south of 50 Gds, XX, Infantry Kges1901 (talk) 19:52, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Day5-2. --

@Goran tek-en: Ok for day 5, other than that 5 Gds (Mechanized, X) should be using the File:NATO Map Symbol - Motorised Infantry.svg symbol instead. Kges1901 (talk) 12:30, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Day5-3. I didn't know if the X should be blue or red? --Goran tek-en (talk) 16:51, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: It should be red. Kges1901 (talk) 16:54, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Day5-4. --Goran tek-en (talk) 17:35, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: I have seen something which I think is a mistake. The dashed line we used to show troops on the first day is the same dashed line we use to show troops the other days also, or have I just mixed it up. --Goran tek-en (talk) 17:55, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: The link for 5-4 is 404. Regarding the lines, I think that using the same color in this case is fine because those units stayed in the same place for the period on the map, so they didn't change locations. Kges1901 (talk) 18:46, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: The link works anyway now (checked in incognito so no memory issue by me), it might have been some temporary server issue. It's not the color I mean it's the dashes. --Goran tek-en (talk) 14:15, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
@Goran tek-en: Using the same color is fine since we are creating separate maps for each day. Kges1901 (talk) 10:45, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Is Day 5 done? --Goran tek-en (talk) 10:12, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Shall we continue or? --Goran tek-en (talk) 16:11, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: Apologies for the belated response - real life got in the way, but Day 5 is done. Kges1901 (talk) 20:13, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Day 6[edit]

Nikopol sector, Verkhnye Rogachuk sector, Konstantinovka sector Soviet positions marked by red with green borders. Kges1901 (talk) 19:49, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: I'm sorry I didn't mean to push you, I just didn't want this not to be completed.

Day6-1. I have drawn some black lines to show you what I have mentioned before. That the dashed line for the first day is the same as we use for areas (not front lines) and to me that is not correct. I think we should have another type of lines for areas after day 1.

@Goran tek-en: It is ok that it has the same type of line because those units (behind the front lines) did not change positions after Day 1 and stayed in the same place for the duration we have on the map. For the time being, you can upload what we have so far as I think it is adequate for the article that it will be on. Kges1901 (talk) 11:59, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Is day 6 finished?

I will need the following for each day/file;

Name of the file
Description (/language)
Captions/s (/language)
Category/ies at commons

to be able to upload it at commons. If you don'y know about Captions read here.--Goran tek-en (talk) 18:00, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: I will be unable to work on this for some three weeks, just so you know. --Goran tek-en (talk) 18:47, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
@Goran tek-en: Ok then, we can return to this in mid-September. Thanks, Kges1901 (talk) 18:51, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: I'm back now but I still need information/answers as above. --Goran tek-en (talk) 18:41, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Do you have time to provide me with the needed info as above, I would like to close this, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 17:13, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: I mark this

Stale

as I need your feedback but don't hear from you. --Goran tek-en (talk) 14:59, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901: Is it possible for you to help me finish this request? --Goran tek-en (talk) 15:39, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Projection identification[edit]

Polynesian migration map

Article(s): Polynesia etc

Request: The map was originally in equirectangular projection, as in its description, but has since been changed to what looks like orthographic projection. Can someone please confirm what projection this is so that the description can be updated? Thanks!
Graphist opinion(s)

1796 Italian campaign maps[edit]

Nap07.pdf
Siege of Mantua Campaign Map 1796 1797.JPG
Arcole 1796 Campaign Map.jpg

Article(s): en:Battle of Arcole, ru:Бой при Арколе

Request: I tried converting the PDF to SVG automatically, but the result was messy. There are also some things to be fixed here: Vaubois is spelled incorrectly; Davidovich corps (18k troops) present in Ala by the 12th is not shown; Massena's strength actually was around 9,500 while Augereau had 8,300 (his movement towards Brenta and back is also not shown); Joubert is incorrectly shown to leave Legnago completely (while a single demi-brigade was dispatched); presence of 28k troops in Mantua under Wurmser's command may also be depicted. --Qbli2mHd (talk) 17:52, 28 April 2019 (UTC); If an SVG is made, it can be changed slightly to substitute the other two images. --Qbli2mHd (talk) 18:03, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
Graphist opinion(s)

@Qbli2mHd: I can help you with this but first I want to make sure that you will be available for information and feedback, so please ping me and answer here, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 17:05, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: sure --Qbli2mHd (talk) 22:16, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Request taken by Goran tek-en (talk) 12:24, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Extended content

@Qbli2mHd: This is a draft of the base map so check it and tell me if you want anything edited. I also wonder what that symbol means that is at Bresica?, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 14:01, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: looks great. There is another typo: of course it should be en:Brescia. And if I get it right, you ask about symbols also marking the cities of Mantua, Verona, Padua etc: these denote fortified settlements. --Qbli2mHd (talk) 23:16, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

@Qbli2mHd: Some qustions;

What do the two circles around Mantua depict?
Are all the dashed lines with arrow, movements?
Some blue dashed lines start with a dashed circle, what are the circles?
There are two solid red lines/arrows, what are they? --Goran tek-en (talk) 19:10, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Circles around Mantua denote 28k Austrian troops under Wurmser's command besieged by Kilmaine's troops.
Dashed lines are movements, the circles they start from are divisions' initial positions.
Red arrows to the east: army of Alvinczi approached Brenta by November 5th split into two columns of roughly equal size (I think it's better to omit the numbers by them). Quosdanovich's column reached Brenta at Bassano and Provera's at Fontaniva. --Qbli2mHd (talk) 21:31, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

@Qbli2mHd: Some of the blue dashed movements are almost exactly following roads. Should they exactly follow the roads (did the troops transport on them) or just next to them? Please ping me, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 18:00, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: yes, it denotes movement via roads, you may design it as you see fit. You may also find these maps helpful as they show troop movements better. I'd also like some corrections as per this map: to change the name of "Arcola" to "Arcole", "Villanuova" to "San Bonifacio" and also remove the Tramigna stream, tributary joining Alpone from the west (it's currently depicted as if the road crosses two rivers which is not very important for the map). --Qbli2mHd (talk) 00:50, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

@Qbli2mHd: Draft 3, for you to check. The fortified settlements, did they belong to either side, blue/red or should they be as they are? Feedback, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 15:39, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: I think it's better to mark only the Quadrilateral fortresses (Peschiera, Mantua, Legnago and Verona) and sign them as such in the legend. Regarding the colours: the only important thing to show here is that Mantua is held by the Austrians and besieged by the French (the other three are never reached by the Austrians). You could either paint the French-held fortresses blue and Mantua red or just draw a red circle around Mantua (with a bigger blue circle around it in either case).
Name of Alvinczi is misspelled.
It would be good to show that Vaubois' initial position was to the north of Trent as he attacked the Austrians at San Michele on November 2, but there is too little space in the map. If it can be enlarged a bit we could show the initial positions and engagement as well as manpower (10,500 for Vaubois and 18,400 for Davidovich), if it's not an option we could just show Vaubois' retreat from the north to Rivoli and Davidovich's advancement to Serravalle (village itself can be omitted on the map). --Qbli2mHd (talk) 19:09, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
Initial positions on the east also can be improved. I think we should show Alvinczi's army at Bassano and Fontaniva opposed by Augereau and Massena respectively on the western bank of Brenta, and the armies' subsequent movement towards Verona. --Qbli2mHd (talk) 01:52, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

@Qbli2mHd: Draft 4.

For this "Initial positions on the east also can be improved. I think we should show Alvinczi's army at Bassano and Fontaniva opposed by Augereau and Massena respectively on the western bank of Brenta, and the armies' subsequent movement towards Verona." I need specifics about what to put out. I don't have any knowledge of who is who or anything. What is Fontaniva?
As we have same armies doing different stuff on different days, for me it's hard to understand that when they look the same. Would the map benefit from in some way having different colors/symbols for the different days? --Goran tek-en (talk) 19:08, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: take a look at this map, I think it'll make me easier to understand. What we need to show:

In the north: on 2 November Vaubois division advances from Trent to attack Davidovich corps positioned in San Michele. Then armies move south and have another battle at Calliano on 6 November. Afterwards Vaubois retreats to Rivoli and Davidovich advances to Serravalle.
In the east: on 6 November Austrians under Alvinczi (28,000) are attacked from the west bank by Augerau division (8,300) at Bassano and by Masséna division (9,400) at Fontaniva. Afterwards the French retreat to Verona, while Austrians advance to Caldiero.

It would be less confusing if we only had a single symbol for each unit on the map. --Qbli2mHd (talk) 06:22, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

@Qbli2mHd: I'm sorry but this is really complicated for me without any knowledge of this so I have to take a step back so I can get the basics right, I hope that is OK with you. The draft here is for the northern part you explained and is so I can get things right.

We have File:Template of Military Symbols.svg this template with military symbols but if you don't intend to show different sizes, types of units I don't think we have any usage of them?
2/11 Did Davidovich (blue) win so after that they were advancing and red was retreating?
I have added lines-arrows (just draft ones) and solid is forward and dashed is pulling back, does that work for you?
I don't know where blue went after 6/11 as I can't find Serravalle in this area.
Is it OK to have battle marks with dates in them?
Please always add (red) or (blue) when you say who did what, it's so much easier for me. --Goran tek-en (talk) 13:21, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: looks good. I'd only move names closer to initial positions (Vaubois to Trent and Davidovich to San Michele) and place "2 Nov." battle symbol below San Michele so that red arrow points at it.

We can manage without NATO symbols if we show numbers since all of units are infantry.
I gave a link to Serravalle previously. --Qbli2mHd (talk) 20:33, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

@Qbli2mHd: Sorry about Serravalle, my mistake.

Now we have a working method, thanks. Draft 6. --Goran tek-en (talk) 15:15, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en: I've only just noticed we got colours messed up. Let's have the French in blue and the Austrians in red.

I also wonder if increasing the font size up 1 pt would increase readability.

We can also show en:Battle of Caldiero (1796) (another victory for the Austrians on November 12).

We should also show that there're Wurmser's 28k in Mantua besieged by Kilmaine's 8,300. --Qbli2mHd (talk) 04:41, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

@Qbli2mHd: Draft 7.

You wrote: We can also show en:Battle of Caldiero (1796) (another victory for the Austrians on November 12). You have to explain what you want in detail otherwise I don't know..
What else do you want by Mantua?
Of course I can increase the font size but do you mean all text?
When I make a map I never know at which size it will be viewed and it probably varies. So I make it readable at 100% but do you know at which size you will use it because then I can make it for that size? --Goran tek-en (talk) 16:38, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

@Qbli2mHd: I mark this

Stale

as I need your feedback but don't hear from you. --Goran tek-en (talk) 14:56, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

@Qbli2mHd: Is it possible for you to help me finish this request? --Goran tek-en (talk) 15:36, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

1935[edit]

Article(s): en:1935

Request: please correct Alaska flag to US as anachronism… --Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 05:08, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
Graphist opinion(s)

The current flag of Alaska was adopted in 1927, before the time period represented by this map. Whether it should instead use another copy of the United States flag is uncertain. (Alaska was a territory at this time and would be admitted as a state only in 1959.) –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 05:52, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

It's not a country-other flags used are not subnational.Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 05:40, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

I agree that Alaska should have the American flag -- Korea was a Japanese territory at the time, and this map correctly has the Japanese flag over Korea. --1990'sguy (talk) 15:14, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Standardized SVG blank map of Indian states[edit]

PNG version (outdated)

Article(s): None, but will likely be used to make many derivative maps

Request: Create a standardized blank map of Indian states and territories, like this one for the United States. Above is the closest PNG analog, but it is out of date. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 05:02, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
Graphist opinion(s)

@LaundryPizza03: If you want help with this please give us valid sources that we can use. We are graphic workers, not researchers etc, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 17:52, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

[6]? –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 18:36, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

@LaundryPizza03: That link is no good as I can't run Internet explorer 6 or above, I'm on a Linux computer, so please provide something else, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 18:32, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

@LaundryPizza03: I found this map. It it usable as it is? But if needed, I can make a lighter version of it to match the colours of the .png map above. --Garabond (talk) 12:20, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

South Sudan borders need to be added in these orthographic maps[edit]

Administered Western Sahara (orthographic projection).svg Done
Asia (orthographic projection).svg Done
Azerbaijan (orthographic projection).svg Done
Azerbaijan with Nagorno Karabakh region.svg Done
CPV orthographic NaturalEarth.svg Done
Customs Union of Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Russia (orthographic projection).svg Done
Eurasian Economic Union (orthographic projection).svg Done
Dominion of Pakistan & Indian Controlled Kashmir (orthographic projection).svg Done
Egypt (orthographic projection) highlighted.svg Done
EU27 on a globe.svg Done
European Union Morocco Locator (orthographic projection).svg Done
India (orthographic projection).svg Done
Iran Ecuador (orthographic projection).svg Done
Iran Lebanon (orthographic projection).svg Done
Latin Africa (orthographic projection).svg Done
Lebanon (orthographic projection).svg Done
Libya North Africa (orthographic projection).svg Done
Madagascar (orthographic projection).svg Done
Mughal Empire (orthographic projection).svg Done
Nanyue.svg Done
North Asia (orthographic projection).svg Done
Oman (orthographic projection).svg Done
Pakistan & Indian Controlled Kashmir (orthographic projection).svg Done
Pakistan (orthographic projection) wd.svg Done
Pakistan (orthographic projection) with J. and Kashmir.svg Done
Pakistan (orthographic projection).svg Done
Pakistan orthographic projection.svg Done
People's Republic of China (orthographic projection).svg Done
Republic of China (orthographic projection) copy.svg Done
Republic of China (orthographic projection).svg Done
Russian Federation (orthographic projection) highlighted.svg Done
Russian Federation (orthographic projection) marked.svg Done
Serbia (orthographic projection).svg Done
Songhai Empire (orthographic projection).svg Done
Spain WS-included (orthographic projection).svg Done
Union State.svg Done
Western Sahara (orthographic projection).svg Done
Kashmir conflict disputed territory animation.png
Azerbaijan (orthographic projection).png
Russian Federation (orthographic projection).svg
I'm not allowed to update this file.

Article(s): Many articles across Wikipedia.

Request: The borders of South Sudan need to be added in these orthographic maps. --Maphobbyist (talk) 17:28, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

@Maphobbyist: I have added the border to all the maps with Done. At the bottom there are two bitmap maps that I hope you can take. Also there is one which I was not allowed to upload a new version of. --Goran tek-en (talk) 16:14, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Graphist opinion(s)

The modern borders need to be removed from the circumnavigation maps of Magellan and Elcano. They are anachronistic.[edit]

Magellan's voyage AZ.svg
Magellan's voyage EN it.svg
Magellan's voyage EN.svg
Magellan's voyage ET.svg
Magellan's voyage HE.png
Magellan's Voyage HR.PNG
Magellan's voyage HU.svg
Magellan's voyage HY.svg
Magellan's voyage MK.svg
Magellan's voyage PL.svg
Magellan's voyage PT.svg
Magellan's voyage SR.svg
Magellan's voyage zh-classical.svg
Magellan's voyage-fr.svg
Itinerario de Magallanes y Elcano.jpg
Magellan-Harita-Tr.jpg
Magellan-Map-En.png
Magellan-Map-No.png

Article(s): Many articles across Wikipedia.

Request: The modern borders need to be removed from the circumnavigation maps of Magellan and Elcano. They are anachronistic. --Maphobbyist (talk) 17:58, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Graphist opinion(s)

@Maphobbyist: Would simply removing the borders altogether suffice, or should the borders be redrawn in some fashion? (in which case I would need sources) --Garabond (talk) 18:33, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

The borders should be totally removed. Maphobbyist (talk) 16:33, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Plastic bag legislation[edit]

Plastic bag legislation around the world

Article(s): en:Phase-out of lightweight plastic bags

Request: Please could someone remove the subnational boundaries on Pakistan? The whole country now has bans in place so the subnational boundaries are no longer required. Thanks--Del_Usion23 (talk) 07:42, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
Graphist opinion(s)

Request taken by Garabond (talk) 18:38, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Ottawa rapid-transit map needs multiple edits - File:Oc-transpo-rapid-transit-567O.svg[edit]

Ottawa rapid-transit system map
new map

Article(s): Wikivoyage: Ottawa

Request

With Ottawa finally getting a subway/LRT system in September 2019, the Ottawa rapid-transit system map File:Oc-transpo-rapid-transit-567O.svg is both out-of-date and misleading. I don't have SVG editing software. The list of changes that need to be made is on the file's Discussion page. Could somebody with an SVG editor please make them? --Robkelk (talk) 17:02, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Graphist opinion(s)

I thought it is better to create a comlete new map. --Chumwa (talk) 16:03, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

@Robkelk: The tool is out there, Inkscape and it's free and open source, but it takes some practice. You didn't link to any information, you have to. We do graphic work, not research or gathering information, that is up to you as it's your subject, we have zero knowledge. So link to all of the nedded information and then we will see, thanks for your understanding. --Goran tek-en (talk) 18:23, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Stale

--Goran tek-en (talk) 10:59, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

St. Wenceslas Prison (Prague)[edit]

Hi, I would like to ask you for a favor: could someone of you please make a map with the ground plan of Svatováclavská trestnice (St. Wenceslas Prison, the only prison in Prague till 1890s, when Pankrác prison was opened) - or - could you teach me how to do it? The scheme is to see in this video: ~~https://www.ceskatelevize.cz/porady/10116288835-z-metropole/219411058230033/video/713917?fbclid=IwAR2bcl8fYG1I8LkmUk7EHlwh5p2lH0aUHKGjlvGzQ-xuPh5r09coLO4Tolk~~ at 6:23. I promise to make a stub about the prison then in both cases. Thank you! --Jiří Janíček (talk) 17:15, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

@Jiří Janíček: First it would be great and so much easier for every one if you would use the "Make a new request" link at the top, this gives us all the code we need.

I might be able to help you but you will have to provide me with information/links/layouts/maps or whatever for the prison and tell me what kind of ground plan you want, how much details, what to include and so on, thanks. Please ping me. --Goran tek-en (talk) 18:15, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

@Goran tek-en, Goran:, thank you very much and sorry for my delayed answer. Actually I don't know much what to say to you - more info is anyway here in Czech: https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedie:Pod_l%C3%ADpou/Archiv_2019/02#Svatov%C3%A1clavsk%C3%A1_trestnice. I don't care and have no idea how it should look like, I personally think the scheme that is here: ~~https://www.ceskatelevize.cz/porady/10116288835-z-metropole/219411058230033/video/713917?fbclid=IwAR2bcl8fYG1I8LkmUk7EHlwh5p2lH0aUHKGjlvGzQ-xuPh5r09coLO4Tolk~~ (at time 6:23) is ok, but some colleagu at the cs page recommended something else - a better map is here (but is so big that it's not working for me well): https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/Juttneruv_plan_Prahy.jpg. I hope you can implement the scheme from the video on the map we can use in Wikipedie, what is, I think, the OpenStreetMap? The region on the OpenStreetMap is in this area: https://www.openstreetmap.org/export#map=18/50.07498/14.41582 (Prague, Dittrichova Street). Is there anything else that you need? Can you do it somehow? Thank you! --Jiří Janíček (talk) 13:46, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

~~:::@Jiří Janíček: The videolink that is stroked thru is only 5.38 long so there is no 6.23. Maybe it's the wrong video? And why is the link stroked thru, I thought that meant it was broken...~~

For the big map, I don't know which area you mean. I have made a small version of it, can you encircle which area you mean and show it/send it to me. You have to provide me with something to see, thanks. Please ping me. --Goran tek-en (talk) 14:39, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Request taken by Goran tek-en (talk) 14:50, 8 November 2019 (UTC) I found the correct video on the cs page, forget what I wrote above.

How big area do you want the overall map to cover?
Should today's roads, buildings also be there or should that come from the big map? --Goran tek-en (talk) 14:50, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, the right video is this one: https://www.ceskatelevize.cz/porady/10886931259-tajemstvi-prazskych-dvorku/215411033190003/?fbclid=IwAR2gIFuUpyvKY-C3eBwWCOr8YoMIlgOzIRf--H9E4NCe0xio_ymhoVBeVtw, time 6:23 is ok. More trough e-mail. Thank you! --Jiří Janíček (talk) 18:43, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

@Jiří Janíček: It's really difficult to move information from a today map to the old one, and I'm still not really sure what you want.

This is a draft for you so you can tell me if this is the right shape and if it's in the right position?
This is a draft but is it something like this you want, with the whole of that image also?
In the email you talk about a link to the picture of the former prison, which image?
What can be done on wikipedia concerning overlays and stuff I have no knowledge, but I have seen overlays there. Talk to some other editors. --Goran tek-en (talk) 15:22, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

@Jiří Janíček: I mark this

Stale

as I need your feedback but don't hear from you. --Goran tek-en (talk) 15:00, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi Goran, thank you very much, actually I see that I am not able to answer your questions and actually don't know what is possible to do. I asked a colleague from cs wiki Matej Orlicky, if he would be se nice and would answer your questions (https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diskuse_s_wikipedistou:Mat%C4%9Bj_Orlick%C3%BD#Svatov%C3%A1clavsk%C3%A1_trestnice). All I can say is that I in between founded two another maps that I am sending you through e-mail - and it seems the prison is not the building you marked in the draft - but probably the building no. 329 lower - I hope Matej will tell us more realiably). Thank you! --Jiří Janíček (talk) 16:17, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

@Jiří Janíček: Please always ping me, thanks. I don't understand what you meant by this file Juttneruv plan - snad Svatovaclavska trestnice.jpg that you sent me?

The other two you sent show the same area but the encircled shapes are different so now we have three different shapes with the one I show in the draft.

I know where it was situated now but I don't know which of the three different shapes I should use, you have to tell me. --Goran tek-en (talk) 17:58, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

@Jiří Janíček: I haven't heard from you, should we finish this request or what? --Goran tek-en (talk) 15:41, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Location Map of United States Including Alaska and Hawaii[edit]

Location map of United States
Location map of Alaska
Location map of Hawaii

Article(s): Multiple

Request: A location map of the United States that includes both Alaska and Hawaii as inset boxes in the lower left corner. I searched the location map templates and, as far as I can tell, it doesn't exist. I don't know if this is possible given that there would be a large jump in coordinates to allow for the inset boxes. –Noha307 (talk) 02:07, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
Graphist opinion(s): Both File:Usa edcp (+HI +AK) location map.svg and File:Usa edcp (+HI +AK +PR) location map.svg should work with the Location map template, note for the insets you can't use real coordinates though, you have to fake it to get points to show up in the right place, an example of use is in en:List of presidents of the United States by home state. Kmusser (talk) 17:43, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Adding contemporary coastlines to map of Kingdom of Northumbria[edit]

Map of the Kingdom of Northumbria, around 700 AD
Map of England (and Scotland to the Lowland belt)

Article(s): en:Kingdom of Northumbria

Update SVG to show contemporary coastline: Some of the maps of Anglo-Saxon (and Norse) England show coastlines based on David Hill's An Atlas of Anglo-Saxon England, as in File:England green top.svg, with Yorkshire and Lincolnshire in particular shown as being mainly "sea, swap or alluvium". Given there was so much territory to the south of Northumbria, it would be good to see that reflected in the map File:Map of the Kingdom of Northumbria around 700 AD.svg — OwenBlacker (talk; please ping me in replies) 20:52, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
Graphist opinion(s)

2019 Maharashtra Legislative Assembly election[edit]

Base map with constituency numbers

Article(s): en:2019 Maharashtra Legislative Assembly election

Request: Request to edit the base map as per the results and create the file File:2019 Maharashtra Legislative Assembly election results by constituency.svg. Winner parties are listed at en:2019 Maharashtra Legislative Assembly election in section "#Results by constituency". Not all shades are needed to be filled as there are 16 parties. I think only 4 major parties as below can be filled and all others can be clubbed in grey colour as "Others". --§§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 13:18, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Colour	Party
	Bharatiya Janata Party
	Indian National Congress
	Nationalist Congress Party
	Shiv Sena
	Others

Graphist opinion(s)

IMAGE1.EXT

Description of first image
IMAGE2.EXT

Description of second image (if needed)
IMAGE3.EXT

Description of third image (if needed; don't request too many at once, though)

Article(s): [[]]

Request: Details of your request go here… --JoshuaLatusia (talk) 19:32, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
Graphist opinion(s)

FBS Independent Schools Map[edit]

Article(s): en:NCAA Division I FBS independent schools

Request: Need to modify the map to include Connecticut, the University of Connecticut has joined.:
Graphist opinion(s)

Done Nancystodd (talk) 16:45, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Minorax^talk _{(formerly 大诺史)} 06:50, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Nazi Germany 1942[edit]

Germany in 1937, but 1942 seems not available yet.

Article(s): nl:Auschwitz (concentratiekamp) among others

Request: Hello, I would like to make a module like en:Module:Location map/data/Germany 1937 for the Germany of 1942 (including border coordinates), but I couldn't find a file suitable for that. Someone able to help me out?; Borders can be found in this source. --Encycloon (talk) 15:29, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
Graphist opinion(s)

@Encycloon:There are a variety of maps available already. It depends on what kind of map you are looking for. I have added some to the gallery for you to look at, but others are in Category:Maps_of_Nazi_Germany, particularly Category:Locator_maps_of_Nazi_Germany and Category:Maps_of_Europe_under_Nazi_occupation. NikNaks _{talk - gallery - wikipedia} 16:56, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, NikNaks, but I still can't find a map with Nazi Germany in one (neutral) colour and with coordinates available, as is the case with File:German Empire 1937 adm location map.svg. Encycloon (talk) 17:23, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Rock Land SVG needing internal cleanup[edit]

A County in New York

Article(s): en:Rockland County, New York and ors.

Request: There is some inexplicable huge embedded image raster in this SVG for no clear reason. Please remove it and overwrite the current 5.55 MB file. --161.11.160.20 15:21, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
Graphist opinion(s)

161.11.160.20: Done Fixed and reuploaded. Rcsprinter123 (talk) 20:37, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Minorax^talk _{(formerly 大诺史)} 06:51, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Yim Tin Tsai (Sai Kung District)[edit]

Base map of Hong Kong
map need to be retired.

Article(s): en:Yim Tin Tsai (Sai Kung District)

Request: I need to retire a map which 1. Incorrect that missing an island Tai Tau Chau (Sai Kung). 2. It is not SVG map but a PNG map. So, may i request someone using the same caption (Yim Tin Tsai, Sai Kung District; 鹽田仔 (西貢區) ) or longer (location of Yim Tin Tsai (Sai Kung) in Hong Kong; 西貢鹽田仔在香港的位置) and highlight the island Yim Tin Tsai in red as per the png map. Note: There is another Yim Tin Tsai in Tai Po District.

--Matthew hk (talk) 11:28, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Graphist opinion(s)

Need a not-so-jarring version of Map of El Salvador's indigenous peoples[edit]

Article(s): en:Kuzshkatán (Cuzcatlan)

Request: Could someone create a version of File:NATIVE AMERICAN INDIGENOUS PEOPLE OF EL SALVADOR IN CENTRAL AMERICA ISTHMUS.png where the names "Lenca" and "Pipil", as well as the words "NATIVE AMERICAN INDIGENOUS PEOPLE OF EL SALVADOR" are not oversized, using a font that is not so jarring as the present version? Thanks. Carlstak (talk) 17:36, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
Graphist opinion(s)

Coronavirus disease map[edit]

Article(s): A lot of articles around a lot of wikis

Request: Hello, can someone please update this animated map? Source you can use. --Patriccck (talk) 19:00, 1 March 2020 (UTC); Ping @Metropolitan: Map is not currently updated. --Patriccck (talk) 12:28, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
Graphist opinion(s): Ping @Patriccck: Unfortunately, this is getting impossible at this stage. Nearly all European countries have confirmed cases, including San Marino, Monaco, Andorra and Vatican City. We just lack of space to point figures to a specific territories. Metropolitan (talk) 11:35, 8 March 2020 (UTC); Ping @Metropolitan: maybe use just colors and remove numbers? --Accurimbono (talk) 08:21, 13 March 2020 (UTC); Ping @Accurimbono: I'll see what I can do this week-end. Metropolitan (talk) 12:01, 13 March 2020 (UTC); Request taken by Metropolitan (talk) 12:01, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Commons:Graphic Lab/Map workshop

Map workshop

Make a request

See also[edit]

Blank svg map of districts of Turkey[edit]

Map of the 4th Ukrainian Front advance during the Nikopol–Krivoi Rog Offensive 1 to 8 February 1944[edit]

Day 1[edit]

Day 2[edit]

Day 3[edit]

Day 4[edit]

Day 5[edit]

Day 6[edit]

Projection identification[edit]

1796 Italian campaign maps[edit]

1935[edit]

Standardized SVG blank map of Indian states[edit]

South Sudan borders need to be added in these orthographic maps[edit]

The modern borders need to be removed from the circumnavigation maps of Magellan and Elcano. They are anachronistic.[edit]

Plastic bag legislation[edit]

Ottawa rapid-transit map needs multiple edits - File:Oc-transpo-rapid-transit-567O.svg[edit]

St. Wenceslas Prison (Prague)[edit]

Location Map of United States Including Alaska and Hawaii[edit]

Adding contemporary coastlines to map of Kingdom of Northumbria[edit]

2019 Maharashtra Legislative Assembly election[edit]

FBS Independent Schools Map[edit]

Nazi Germany 1942[edit]

Rock Land SVG needing internal cleanup[edit]

Yim Tin Tsai (Sai Kung District)[edit]

Need a not-so-jarring version of Map of El Salvador's indigenous peoples[edit]

Coronavirus disease map[edit]

Navigation menu

Search