File talk:Russia edcp location map.svg

Borderline between Urup and Iturup

Borders between Russia and Japan on this map is completely incorrect, because there is no border between Urup and Iturup. All Kurils de jure and de facto are Russian. It does not matter that Japan claimed some of the Russian Kuril Islands. We must show only the existing borders on all maps. Andrey Isakov (talk) 05:47, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

You are wrong. See en:Kuril Islands dispute. Do not try to enforce the view of one nation in wikipedia. It does matter that Japan claimed some of the Russian Kuril Islands. It makes these 4 Islands disputed as shown in the map. The color is not light-yellow(for Russia) or dark-grey(for all other countries including Japan) but light-grey(for disputed areas). The borders are dashed to also indicate the dispute. Uwe Dedering (talk) 07:36, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Am I wrong? You do not agree with the fact that all the Kuril Islands are Russian since 1945, right? I don't understand... Is this geographical map or politicized geographical map? Or anything else? Ok. Just a simple example: ordinary user of Wiki sees this map. What will he think about those light-gray-colored islands with borders on both sides? No man's land? Or Japanese land? Or US land? Or Russian land?.. etc. This is misleading Wiki users. Andrey Isakov (talk) 11:31, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

The crucial factor that leads to the map is Wikipedia - whereby, in fact, the area is disputed. It's been regarded that location maps should comply with the content of Wikipedia articles. If ru-Wiki has another perception on this issue, you can upload another map for usage in ru-Wiki. But I guess you should discuss this issue here first. --Alexrk2 (talk) 09:41, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok. What can you say about File:Argentina_location_map.svg? Why Falkland Islands are not light-gray-colored? Looks like a double standards... Andrey Isakov (talk) 11:31, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Maybe, but that's another issue - which wasn't contested so far in de-Wiki (as far as i know). Feel free to bring this or other topics up for debate in Wikipedia (e.g. at the de:map lab). Maybe we are able to obtain consensus or if there is a dissenting consensus you might choose to use a different map for your Wiki. Of course it would be nice if each Wikipedia use the same location maps (to ease maintenance) - but it's not mandatory. Just please don't replace existing location maps without prior discussion, because the maps sometimes already went through a lot of cross-wiki-debates. --Alexrk2 (talk) 13:31, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

I have removed the disputed template. There are no new arguments and it is consensus in the locationmap project. Uwe Dedering (talk) 11:41, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Why? I don't see your arguments for removing the template. Do you have a German world atlas? How in the atlas are shown the Kuril Islands? I still have have a complaint about the border. So I have to return the template back.--Andrey Isakov (talk) 04:47, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

You need arguments for inserting the template. Only saying its now russian is not enough. Yes, i have an atlas (from 1969 ;-) ). It shows the japanese POV, solid border between Urup and Iturup, dashed border near Hokkaido, with the text zur Zeit unter sowjetischer Verwaltung (at the moment under sovjet administration). I realized that you can't see on the location map, who is in control of that area. It is not possible to put text on the map, but i can add this to the file description:

Notice

 

Russia

 

other countries

 

disputed areas

 

international border

 

disputed border

Because the southern Kuril islands are claimed by Russia and Japan, they are shown as disputed. These islands are since 1945 under the jurisdiction of the Russian Federation.

 

What do you think about that? Uwe Dedering (talk) 16:22, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

But only saying "they are claimed by Japan" is enough???
You need a new world atlas. Or use authoritative online maps. For example: http://maps.nationalgeographic.com/maps/print-collection/world-map-classic.html, http://maps.nationalgeographic.com/maps/print-collection/world-map-bright.html, etc.
Some of your maps are provocative and misleading. They show boundaries and areas which does not actually exist. This is easily verified in practice: with a Japanese visa you will not get to the Kuriles, but with the Russian visa - no problem. So which country owned the islands shown in light-gray on your map?
I think that there is no need to show the claimed territories at all. Any territory belongs to a particular state. Borders can not be changed for centuries. I have not seen a single authoritative atlas where the southern Kuril Islands were colored a different color than the rest of Russia.--Andrey Isakov (talk) 05:47, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

E.g. "The Comprehensive TIMES Atlas of the World", one of the most recommended atlases of the world, shows the dispute: Administered by Russian Federation, claimed by Japan. NNW (talk) 09:09, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

How is this shown in the Times Atlas?--Andrey Isakov (talk) 16:38, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

With the text I quoted and a dotted (i.e. disputed) boundary. NNW (talk) 17:18, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Please, take a picture of the political map in this Atlas (fragment). Because here on all maps only one boundary (between the Kuriles and Hokkaido).
And what about a color of claimed islands?--Andrey Isakov (talk) 18:29, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

It's a physical map showing elevations so there are no colours for countries. I won't upload a scan because it would be a copyvio. You will have to believe me or obtain that atlas yourself. Alternatively this CIA map showing the same. NNW (talk) 14:07, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Ok. But on the political map in that Atlas there are no double boundaries and there is no different color for south Kuril Islands, right?--Andrey Isakov (talk) 15:22, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

So you would accept the dashed borders, if the 4 islands color would be light-yellow like all russian territory? Uwe Dedering (talk) 17:46, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Border between Nizhny Novgorod and Ivanovo

Hello! There is an error on the border between Nizhny Novgorod and Ivanovo oblasts which is now obsolete. In 1994 Sokolskiy distrct (on russian) moved from Ivanovo Oblast to Nizhny Novgorod Oblast and now their border goes exactly on Volga.--Emaus (talk) 23:28, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Sharp eyes. Correction will follow, also on relief map. Uwe Dedering (talk) 00:47, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

 完成 for both maps. Uwe Dedering (talk) 11:41, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

High traffic page

This map is used in more than 20,000 articles on 16 projects.[1] I've protected it from overwriting by anonymous accounts. Walter Siegmund (talk) 20:16, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Counterproductive edit warring

Please end the counterproductive edit warring that has been occurring on this file page. You can't agree that the disputed tag should be added. Indeed, the boundary dispute is described in en:Kuril Islands dispute, ru:Проблема_принадлежности_южных_Курильских_островов, etc. Why discuss it here?

Please allow me to suggest another approach. I think the file description is unnecessarily brief. For example, the source is given as naturalearthdata.com; but how was the svg file derived, if it wasn't downloaded directly from the cited source? I assume that the parameters listed are inputs to a program called "Natural Earth"; could this be made more clear? Also, a list of subsequent changes and corrections of errors would be helpful to other editors. An explanation of the two boundaries in the Kuril Islands should be given and linked to one of the articles on the dispute, I think.

A link to this discussion may be provided somewhere on the file page. Most of our files are undiscussed, so it doesn't hurt to call attention to a discussion, when it exists. Andrey Isakov may wish to upload his 23 April 2010 version under a new name.[2] If so, it should be described in a neutral manner and may be listed under "other versions" on this file page.

Andrey Isakov, in the future, please do not make content changes to files that are used in thousands of articles without discussing it first on the talk page. That may be seen as provocation by others and is unlikely to be fruitful. Walter Siegmund (talk) 16:44, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

The data for the map comes from naturalearthdata.com. The line is directly copied from [3] I then used a self developed program to make the map. There is nothing to be added to the description in this regard. I inserted now my proposal (did you not see that?) into the description and added a link to en:WP. (talk) 21:17, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

• I don't discuss Kuril Islands dispute here, I discuss the Uwe Dedering's map.
  Uwe Dedering ignores my arguments, so I put a template for attracting attention. Why he removes the template? Does that contradict with the rules?
  Look at this:
  

Notice

 

Russia

 

other countries

 

disputed areas

 

international border

 

disputed border

 

"disputed areas". Ok, Japan still claims the south Kuril Islands. But how ordinary users will know that these islands belongs to Russia now? They should be shown the same color as Russia.
"disputed border". Ok, see above. But, the actual border lies between Hokkaido and the Kuril Islands and there is no border between Urup and Iturup.
Thus, this map is misleading.--Andrey Isakov (talk) 17:19, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome to make the suggestion of the color change. However, I don't understand how this map could be as useful to illustrate the Kuril Islands dispute, etc., without showing the boundary that delimits Japan's claim. Your viewpoint has been well-advertised both here and on AN. If you wish, please upload the version that you prefer, based on reliable sources, and upload it under a different name. Walter Siegmund (talk) 19:19, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

There will be no color change. The light grey shows disputed areas in all location maps. And you should really look, what Andrey Isakov is doing here: He copies the box with the colors, but deletes the sentences that explain... Another point: A map showing only the Russian POV would be not neutral. Uwe Dedering (talk) 19:34, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

What is "Russian POV"? Please explain this. For example, from the German point of view the south Kurils are not part of Russia?
All the Kuriles are part of Russia from any point of view because it is an objective reality. So your position on this issue is not neutral.--Andrey Isakov (talk) 17:09, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

This is location map of Russia, not an illustration to the article about Japan's territorial claims.--Andrey Isakov (talk) 17:09, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

In en:Kuril Islands dispute it says: On July 7, 2005, the European Parliament issued an official statement recommending the return of the territories in dispute, which Russia immediately protested. So this is not only a Japanese claim, it is recognized even in Europe. As long as there is an dispute (and therefor it needs at least two countries) it can be shown in a map. NNW (talk) 09:07, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Here we don't discuss Japan's territorial claims. We discuss the map.--Andrey Isakov (talk) 16:44, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

A map showing the claims because it is about some islands administrated by Russia. It is senseless to divide these items, it is an administrative map. NNW (talk) 17:20, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Borders

Would it be possible to make the borders of the federal subjects stand out a little more? They look fine when one looks at the full map, but when this map is crammed into an infobox (which in en_wiki it now is), it's very easy to miss the fact that the borders are even there.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?);

Well, i tried... but it is protected now from me... Uwe Dedering (talk) 18:36, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Ok, it is unprotected now ([edit=sysop] is removed). I left [upload=autoconfirmed], but that shouldn't prevent established users (like you) from uploading new versions.[4] Walter Siegmund (talk) 20:14, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

@Ëzhiki Tried my best, the visibility is improved now, but i don't think there is more room. (Its because Russia is sooooooooooooo big) And finally! edcp maps in en:WP! :-) Uwe Dedering (talk) 21:09, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Moscow

Moscow border is not closed and looks somwhat odd? Is it really that roundshaped? In Central_Federal_District it looks somehow more like a star.--TUBS 23:38, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

It's really like ellipse (see Moscow map - File:Msk blank.svg or Moscow on Moscow oblast map - File:Russia Moscow oblast rayon division locator map.png). --Emaus (talk) 00:49, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

ok shape is alright then. Still, both ends of the border could be joint. It's hard to see, though.--TUBS 06:31, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Baikal

From Lake Baikal flows out one river - Angara. Source of the second river (Lena basin) is located near Lake Baikal. WBR, BattlePeasant (留言) 03:03, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

That is exactly what this map shows. NNW 09:27, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

I am sorry, you are right. WBR, BattlePeasant (留言) 12:26, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Crimea

The map shows the Kuril Islands as disputed due to the en:Kuril Islands dispute but it does not show Crimea as disputed (it does not show Russias claim and operational control at all). For consistency reasons, would it be appropriate to show both areas as disputed? --Gerrit (留言) 17:19, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

You're right. Unfortunately Crimea isn't shown completely, so this map has to be redrawn. NNW 19:29, 4 January 2019 (UTC)