File talk:Shtokavian subdialects1988.png
Shtokavian subdialects in Slovenia
[edit]
Hi, I think the inclusion of Slovenia was a valid thing to do. Per en:Languages of Slovenia, there are four villages in Slovenia where people speak Serbo-Croatian language of Eastern Herzegovinian dialect. The reference is provided.[1] (in Slovene). --Eleassar (t/p) 12:43, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- BTW, Ljubljana should be put on the map too, as with the other four former republics. --Eleassar (t/p) 15:57, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- Well, that is just textual reference, not graphical one. I am not disputing that people in these villages are speaking the language, but there is a certain procedure that I follow to achieve accuracy in maps: I did not created this map simply by my free hand due to data from textual references. I am usually using Photoshop layers to create maps and my maps are usually based on some other maps that could be found in published or Internet sources (In this case I used two maps published in two quoted books). So, basically I load original map into Photoshop and then I create new empty layer on which I draw new map which have identical borders as original one. In such way, an notable accuracy is achieved and linguistic and state borders in this map are identical as borders in maps from published sources. If we want to keep such accuracy in this map, then additions to it should be also based on other graphical sources (maps) and such sources should be included into reference list on map page. Since user Kwamikagami uploaded new map version without specified graphical source, I had to assume that he draw addition to this simply by his free hand without usage of appropriate layer background in Photoshop. In that case, instead of an accurate sourced work, we would have an original research of an Wiki user. An free hand user drawing based on textual reference is simply not good addition to map created by Photoshop layers. If appropriate graphical source with corresponding linguistic border in Slovenia is presented and quoted then I would not object to such addition in this map. PANONIAN (talk) 21:37, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- Speaking about Ljubljana, I only added those large cities where sizable Serbo-Croatian speaking communities are existing (and when I say sizable, I mean that they form majority or plurality of population in these cities, or if we speak about divided city of Kosovska Mitrovica, in one of two parts of this city). That was my criteria and that is why I did not inlcluded Ljubljana, Priština or some other large cities to this map. PANONIAN (talk) 21:50, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- Well, that is just textual reference, not graphical one. I am not disputing that people in these villages are speaking the language, but there is a certain procedure that I follow to achieve accuracy in maps: I did not created this map simply by my free hand due to data from textual references. I am usually using Photoshop layers to create maps and my maps are usually based on some other maps that could be found in published or Internet sources (In this case I used two maps published in two quoted books). So, basically I load original map into Photoshop and then I create new empty layer on which I draw new map which have identical borders as original one. In such way, an notable accuracy is achieved and linguistic and state borders in this map are identical as borders in maps from published sources. If we want to keep such accuracy in this map, then additions to it should be also based on other graphical sources (maps) and such sources should be included into reference list on map page. Since user Kwamikagami uploaded new map version without specified graphical source, I had to assume that he draw addition to this simply by his free hand without usage of appropriate layer background in Photoshop. In that case, instead of an accurate sourced work, we would have an original research of an Wiki user. An free hand user drawing based on textual reference is simply not good addition to map created by Photoshop layers. If appropriate graphical source with corresponding linguistic border in Slovenia is presented and quoted then I would not object to such addition in this map. PANONIAN (talk) 21:37, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- The provided reference (and all others) mention that the Eastern Herzegovinian dialect is spoken in four villages in Slovenia: Miliči, Bojanci, Marindol and Paunoviči. The maps for the villages are available at Geopedia.si: [2], [3], [4], [5] --Eleassar (t/p) 22:42, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
References are looking OK and I thought that we can use them, but then I saw that I actually used description "according to Pavle Ivić" in this map. So, if we make an addition to this map (based on presented references) then it would not be any more an accurate presentation of Pavle Ivić's work (an he was an respectable linguist). So, I would suggest that this map remains as it is (presenting research of Pavle Ivić), while any possible changes and additions (different from Pavle Ivić's research) should be made in eventual copy of this work that should be uploaded as separate file. PANONIAN (talk) 12:00, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
- I understand your intention to correctly represent the work of Pavle Ivić and support the proposal to create a new copy of the map combining different reliable published sources. For the time being, I've tweaked the image caption in the English Wikipedia (en:Eastern Herzegovinian) - to avoid misunderstandings, the map is now explicitely attributed to Pavle Ivić. --Eleassar (t/p) 08:29, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
