File talk:Splendid fairy wren dist gnangarra.png

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Range map update[edit]

Hi @Gnangarra,

Do you remember which source you used to create this map? I found the following reliable sources but they don't seem to match:

Thanks for any help you can provide. Best, A455bcd9 (talk) 15:00, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was given images of a couple of maps and asked to create this back in 2007, though those archives have been deleted(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gnangarra/arch_TOC). It resembles the current https://inaturalist.ala.org.au/taxa/12083-Malurus-splendens map which is where I'd go now if was creating these maps as its more current, and based on independent multi-sourced observational data with a recording in their data base of the observation. The Au government one is just regions which doesnt necessarily reflect that it may only be found in a small portion on the fringe of the area IMHO the least reliable. Basing solely off a 2009 map that is perhaps risky it has some gaps in its observational data that implies a potential gap in the area of the WA border. If I was to redo it I'd go with combining the UN redlist(2016) and Inaturalist(2022) theres been a lot more research done on the subspecies the map really should be replaced with it including identification of sub species regions as well. Gnangarra 02:51, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Gnangarra. If I'm not mistaken, the Inaturalist (2022) map is perfectly identical to the IUCN Red List (2016): no? The only difference is the addition of some observations by contributors, but I think this would fall under w:en:WP:UGC on the English Wikipedia and not be considered reliable unfortunately.
Should we at least add the IUCN (2016) map to Commons and start from there to see if we can improve it further? A455bcd9 (talk) 08:05, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@A455bcd9 yes ironically the observation and identity require multiple reviews before they are accepted but yes the red list is fine even if 6/7 years out of date its still more recent than anything available 15 years ago. Gnangarra 09:52, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@A455bcd9 yes ironically the observation and identity require multiple reviews before they are accepted but yes the red list is fine even if 6/7 years out of date its still more recent than anything availab 15 years ago. Gnangarra 09:53, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Gnangarra OK, I'll try to do it. What's the best way to "convert" a map such as this one to an SVG? Just open a background map of Australia and superpose a screenshot of the IUCN map and then draw it manually using Inkscape? Or download the "Range data - Polygons (SHP)" on the IUCN website? A455bcd9 (talk) 10:31, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Here it is!
A455bcd9 (talk) 17:15, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]