User talk:MapMaster/Archive02

This is Talk Archive #02 for User talk:MapMaster For even earlier talk, see User talk:MapMaster/Archive01

Italy 1000 map

Ciao! Thank very much, I didn't expect you were working on one of my maps. I'm very pleased, and the map is excellent at usual. I've these notes:

I'm writing my response in italics.

Please note that this map was dated to the year 1000 to (also) meet a request on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps/Requested and orphan maps#Re-creation requests for a map from that year. So, I tried to reconcile information between these two maps, as well as 3 others, as well as the information I could find on the Internet.

Could you provide reference information for your map, so I can include it as a reference??

Typo on Benvento instead than Benevento

Oooops. Bad mistake. By the way, that area of the map was getting very crowded, so I decided to not label the cities there (in particular since they have the same names as their states0. I put a small star instead showing that that city is the capital/center of the state.

Missing the small though important states of Pisa, Amalfi Gaeta (they are visible on the map I've uploaded here. I should find somewhere also the territories of Genoa.

I missed the Duchy of Amalfi. I have fit that in (somehow!). Regarding Pisa and Genoa, all the information I found showed them achieving independence (or a sort) after the year 1000.

The north-western tip of Mark of Verona (instead of "Duchy of Verona") should be part of the Bishoprics of Brixen and Trent, so it's better you put to H.R.Empire like in my map.

Thanks for the information on Verona. I fixed that, although I have been using the term "Marquisate" instead of "Mark" or "March" or "Margravate". maybe I should switch everything to "Mark" since it is such a shorter word.

My information is that the Bishopric of Trent became independent in 1027 and Brixen in 1179.

You should find the reign then existing in Sardinia here (also on my map page). You should call them Giudicato di...

I changed it to "Giudicato di Sardinia (disputed)". Is that OK?

Corsica: that's hard... it should have a blend (maybe using diagonal bars?) of colours of Pisa and Genoa... I know that Pisa conquered it all only in 1050. Also to Pisa should belong the Tuscany islands, they are visible on my map. If you write c. 1030 in your map, I think we sohould be able to assign it to Pisa (maybe with a note: disputed with Genoa and Muslims...).

Right now, I would still like just to say "(disputed)" on Corsica rather than try to explain the situation.

The Papal States never truly existed (instead of what most maps show) until the 14th century, and the popes struggled until early 1500s before their unity was more than nominal. Around 1000 I think popes controlled just what is now Lazio (as in my map), the remaining of the yellow area in your map divided between free communes and independents petty lords, I think under nominal suzerainty of papal vicars. So I'd put back the Romaniola (I knew of a Mark of Ancona, but ain't sure it existed already in 1000) and Pentapolis that are on my map, maybe with different coulours blended with diagonal bands of the same colour of Papal States.

You raise some good points here. I've tried to do as you suggest, but using a border color instead of stripes.

The northern area of Pri. of Capua is missing on your map. Also missing is county of Apulia.

I've extended Capua. Regarding Apulia, most of the maps I saw did not show Apulia and I was not able to find any information on an independent Apulia on the Internet, so I have continued to leave that out.

In the meantime, I'll search for further info. Thank you very much and good work!!! --Attilios 23:46, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome. Italy is certainly difficult with all the little states and shifting borders and men ruling more than 1 state at a time. <sigh> MapMaster 01:17, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Italy 1000

Grazie, MapMaster. Wikipedia is better because of your cartographic skills! Warmest regards --Neutrality^talk 15:36, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For earlier messages, please see User talk:MapMaster/Archive01

Image:Ancient Greek Colonies of N Black Sea.png

Thank you for this map! But could you correct it a little bit? The Isthmus of Perekop which connects Crimea to the mainland is much narrower than on your map. And the Arabat Spit is a long spit, but not two islands. It will be very nice of you to correct this. Probably this map can help you.

Don Alessandro 15:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Borysthenes

I thank you, too, MapMaster. When you have a chance, could you please move Borysthenes (Berezan) a bit to the west? It is located at the entrance to the Dnieper-Bug estuary, to the south-west from Olbia, as you can see here. Thanks!--Barbatus 16:16, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

... And here's another candidate for your map: Chersonesos. Merci,--Barbatus 16:29, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to both of you for your input. I will fix that later today.

Barbatus, I still can't find Borysthenes (Berezan). The coordinates above seem to point to a spot on the mainland, and not an island. In any case, my goal is to provide very accurate maps -- just let me know where this little bit of land might be. Thanks for bringing this to my attention, MapMaster 17:44, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Geographical coordinates of the Berezan Island are given in the respective article. Here it is.
And one more thing, I've just noticed. The map shows a "lake" on the Dnieper river. This is the Kakhovka Reservoir - an artificial lake built in 1956. So, it did not exist in ancient times.

Don Alessandro 18:01, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Dead MapMaster, I am thoroughly pleased with the new map and look forward to working with you again! For instance, there is no map of Golden Horde. Please keep up the good work. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 07:47, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MapMaster, do not believe Ghirla! You're very much alive. :)--Barbatus 17:57, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kerkinitis

Hi, Master of Maps! I've just noticed: Kerkinitida on your map should actually read "Kerkinitis". That "-ida" is the usual ending of Russian forms of the Ancient Greek feminine: Thetis → Фетида (Fetida), Isis → Исида (Isida), Colchis → Колхида (Kolkhida), etc. ... Would you please? ... Also, I have a few relevant articles in PDF with maps of the region; can send 'em to you, if you're interested. Regards, --Barbatus 17:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment. I have changed the map, although sometimes you will have to clear your computer cache to see the change. I don't need the articles at this time, but I appreciate the offer and may take you up on this if I return to this subject. Thanks again, MapMaster 04:33, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maps 'n' such

Love the maps! I'm a wiki-mapmaker myself, but yours are very professional looking. What program do you use? Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 03:03, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Will review your guidelines and try to adapt. I've started using inkscape but find it cumbersome. Maybe I'm just not used to it yet. Most of the maps I've done have been with just paintbrush. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 05:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You may be interested in this series of maps that I am preparing. I'm not sure that the color scheme is standard; I've tried to be true to the colors used in Cassel's to the extent possible. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 18:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Golden Horde

Hello. I do like your new map but I don't know much about the extent of the Horde. The location of Sarai appears to be accurate (there seem to have been two cities with this name). Probably we could represent some of the successor states (Great Horde, Nogai Horde) and some key battles (Battle of Kulikovo, Battle of the Vorskla River, Great standing on the Ugra River). Anyway, I asked User:Untifler to come up with suggestions and perhaps Brian will also take a look. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 14:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I'm not a specialist in the Golden Horde history, too. But I've noticed one thing: southern shore of Crimea, the Taman peninsula and the city of Tana (near the mouth of the Don river) were controlled by the republic of Genoa, not by the Horde. De jure Genoesians recognized the sumpreme jurisdiction of the Horde, but de facto they ruled their colonies independently. There also was the Principality of Theodoro in the Crimean mountains (see my Image:Caffa and Theodoro.PNG), but it is probably too small to be displayed at your map.

As I've said I'm not a specialist of the Golden Horde history, the main interest of mine is Crimea. So, if you will have questions about Crimea, feel free to ask me. Don Alessandro 14:56, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A few minor points:

I would make the star representing Sarai a little smaller.

Done

Anatolia looks a little distorted. We should probably be able to see part of its southern coast in the bottom left hand corner.

This map uses a Lambert azimuthal projection which makes the latitude lines curved, but has the advantage of accurately representing the area. You are correct, however, in that I missed a small bit of the southern coast, which I have now added.

I concur with Don Alessandro re: the southern Crimea, Taman and Tana.

I added what I could put in the small space, and color coded it as a dependency.

Would it be possible to mark some of the other major states (Chagatai Khanate, Transoxiana, Lithuania, Sibir, etc.) in different colors?

This map is designed to show the domain of the Golden Horde only, without labels so that it could be used in all Wikipedias. I even debated whether to show Moscovy as a dependency or not. So, the answer is "No", although I could make a separate English language map if you wish.

-- Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 18:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added comments in italics above. I also took the opportunity to heighten the contrast between the 2006 international boundaries and the rivers. Thanks for your help, Brian and Don. MapMaster 04:29, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I also thank you for excellent map for uk:Золота Орда (Golden Horde). Hope, this is not latest your edit, not latest you map etc. Good luck!--Albedo ^@ 06:27, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'd looked the map, some minor questions I have I'd listed at Talk:Golden Horde. I have a little experience in vector graphic, but I try to list my additions at en:Image:Golden Horde 1389 Untifler.svg.. I also may upload a map from Tatar Encyclopaedia, but it could be a bit illegal :) --Üñţïf̣ļëŗ (see also:ә? Ә!) 18:18, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More over, I'd created some maps, inspirited by your: en:Image:Astrakhan Khanate map.svg and en:Image:Siberia Khanate map English.svg. --Üñţïf̣ļëŗ (see also:ә? Ә!) 18:21, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mapmaker's star

The least I can do is return the favor, thank you and congrats yourself for the great work. I did a bunch of sorting with the requested maps category that hopefully makes things easier to find. Kmusser 15:24, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greek black sea colonies map

I got your message. I'll get started on it this weekend. I'll see what I can do about the SVG glitch. Try testing it on a user subpage. The Kerkinidita problem is on my computer too, so it's definitely not your cache. I'm going to see if changing it into a bitmap and then re-exporting it as SVG or PNG will help. It's probably a lost cause for the SVG- switching to bitmap will probably lose the main advantage of the format, which is that it's easy to edit.

By the way, Inkscape is easy to learn. I just used the tutorial. Honestly, before inkscape it had been years since I had read a manual or taken a tutorial...But it's easy to use afterwards.

Also, the color scheme suggested is what I used for two of my maps, but the others used colors that sort of "matched" the scheme in the page. I'll implement the color code from now on.

Faci Carta! --CommKing 02:08, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing- before I finish that map, I'll need to know what font you used to make the text. As it turns out the best solution is copying the image directly into Microsoft Paint. Photoshop (Which I have- and legally! I actually bought it!) doesn't let you manipulate individual pixels very easily, and it can be finicky when it comes to being precise. So I need to know what font to use before I upload a new version. --CommKing 02:23, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Roger II

Ciao! Good to see you also interested in one of my favourite articles! As for maps, do you have some free time for map of Sardinian giudicati? Bye and good work. --Attilios 23:31, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think I will have time for the Sardinian work. Right now, I am struggling with the Roger II map - I found the article very, um, technical, so I've been copyediting it to produce more flow as well as to try to explain enough so that the average English-language layperson could understand it on first read. And I have a couple maps to do after Roger II, but then . . .! MapMaster 04:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your maps

I ran across your username and just wanted to stop by and say hello. It's nice to see a fellow cartographer at work on wiki - your maps are beautiful, and a great edition to the articles in wiki. If you haven't had a chance to see the maps I've worked on, check out my gallery and let me know what you think! :) Rarelibra 19:24, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind words. Someday I hope to equal your output. I ran across your maps when I started creating my recent historical Italian maps. I particularly like your provincial maps - they are clean with clear lines and colors that work. I like them so much, in fact, that I just recommended them to User:52_Pickup who is working on a series of German provincial maps. MapMaster 04:57, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Graphics Lab Maps

There is already a strong and vibrant maps community here in English Wikipedia. Please join that community instead of setting up a duplicate project at Graphics Lab. We don't need two sets of standard colors, yet another way to request maps, differing standards, etc. Thanks, MapMaster 05:07, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While we certainly want to avoid duplication of efforts, the Graphics lab presents one very important advantage: it facilitates colaboration. When someone asks for a map to be created or modified, (s)he can then see the proposed image and comment on it. The same goes for the other cartographers; they can and do comment on the proposed image, or modify the SVG themselves. If you browse the French graphics lab, you can see that this has worked quite well -- it's an amazingly productive community. Whatever the auspices under which this sort of process takes place matter little to me, so long as they faciliate colaboration, which is the wiki way.

As for the colors, well, that sort of stuff can be standardised. But I'd encourage you to give the graphics lab a second thought -- it's very user-friendly for both map-markers and those who ask for maps to be made. Thanks. --Zantastik talk 08:56, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the Graphics Lab is a great idea. I've checked in on the French version from time to time (despite my poor Français) and I've often thought how useful it would be to have a group of experts like that here.

My concern is that we don't need a third way to request maps or yet another set of suggested colors (etc.). Let's figure out how to leverage the existing infrastructure. MapMaster 13:45, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recent copyedits

You made a series of recent copyedits to Alfonso of Hauteville, Robert II of Capua, Ranulf II of Alife, and Roger II of Sicily. The nature of some of these edits makes it difficult to discern what was actually done by looking that the histories. I did notice at Alfonso's article, that some information about the extant of the Capuan principality in his time was removed. Why? Also, at Ranulf's article, the presence of Ranulf at Lothair's imperial coronation was removed. Why? I understand that you are trying to increase the flow of the article, but I think information should not be removed in the process unless it is irrelevant to the subject. I just wanted to raise my concerns here. If you can explain these deletions, that would be nice.

Also, in more than one place you refer to the "flowery language" as probably a relict of the EB 1911, but, in fact, it is just my typical writing style. I read too much old books! Srnec 23:16, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, your maps are very nice and useful, but the "Southern Italy circa 1000" isn't showing up. Do you know why? Srnec 04:14, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind words regarding the maps. I do not understand the reference to '"Southern Italy circa 1000" not showing up'. I would like to investigate if you tell me where to look.

Regarding the edits, I was just trying to put some flow into the article, in part by occasionally removing what I thought were digressions, deleting placenames I could not verify (e.g. Amitenno and Ceprani in the Alfonso article) and also changing some of the modern-day phrases (e.g. "mopped up") to more formal wordings.

I did review my edits on the 4 articles (Alfonso of Hauteville, Robert II of Capua, Ranulf II of Alife, and Roger II of Sicily) and they looked reasonable -- at least to me : ) . I did re-insert the note about Ranulf appearing at Lothair's coronation back into Ranulf's article. You are right -- it is appropriate. You are welcome to change anything I added or re-insert anything I deleted. These are very good and much-needed articles and you are to be congratulated for creating them! MapMaster 15:51, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou. The map I was referring to is "Italy 1000 AD.svg". Does it show up on your browser? Srnec 17:35, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When I go to the "Italy 1000 AD.svg" page at Commons, it shows up, but if I click on the image shown there, my one computer's browser crashes and my other asks if want to open or download the file. Does that help? MapMaster 05:51, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arabic translation of: Image:Invasions of the Roman Empire 1.png

I'm sure it would be usefull for the Arabic Wikipedia, if I forgott to translate something, please inform me about it:

Western Roman Empire:الامبراطوريه الرومانيه الغربية
Eastern Roman Empire:الامبراطوريه الرومانيه الشرقية
CE:ق . م.
Carthage: قرطاج
Invasions of the Roman Empire:غزو الامبراطوريه الرومانيه
Goths:قوط
Adrianople:أدرنة
Franks:فرنجة
Saxons:سكسونيون
Angles:إنجليز
Rome:روما
Constantinople:القسطنطينيه
Huns:الهون
Jutes:جوت
Ostroghots:قوط شرقيون
Hun Capital:عاصمة الهون
Vandals:واندل
Visigoths:قوط غربيون

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Escondites (talk • contribs) 13:07, 29 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Here is the map I created based on your information: Image:Invasions of the Roman Empire Arabic.png. I do need the Arabic for "Chalons or Battle of Chalons or Battle of the Catalaunian Fields ". Let me know if there are any changes. MapMaster 03:20, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arabic version of the "Invasions of the Roman Empire"

Thanks for the map! It looks very good, but you should delete the SVG version, SVG graphics don't support right-to-left systems like Arabic and Hebrew and so on... Tomorrow I'm gonna put in some articles in ar.wiki, and if you need any other translations, just contact me :-) --escondites 16:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your help. It was honestly very exciting to be translating the map not only into another language but another alphabet. Keep me in mind if you run across a needed map. MapMaster 23:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Map request for Baltic tribes

Can I somehow bribe you to make a map for me? :) I saw your brilliant map on Battle of Saule, and I thought might you be interested in creating a map of the Baltic tribes for the 10-12th centuries? Here are the sources:

Latvian part (very low quality). Note that Livonians (in green) are not Balts. There is no need to detail the "transitional" regions.
Lithuanian part (very fancy)
General look (ignore the last three colors in the legend that say "kultūra")

Translations:

Lithuanians - Lietuviai
Latgalians - Latgaliai
Prussians - Prūsai
Samogitians - Žemaičiai
Semigallians (Zemigalians) - Žiemagaliai
Aukštaitians - Aukštaičiai
Yotvingians-Sudovians - Jotvingiai-sudūviai
Selonians - Sėliai
Curonians (Kursi) - Kuršiai
Nadruvians - Nadruviai
Skalvians - Skalviai
Lamatians - Lamatiečiai
Galindians - Galindai

If you need any help, just let me know. Thanks a ton, and have a wonderful New Year! Renata 18:06, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would love to. I enjoyed making the Livonian Confederation map and this Baltic Tribes map looks interesting as well, with exotic peoples (exotic to me, at least) in a distant time. Give me a week or so, and I should have a first try. MapMaster 18:49, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome! :) Can't wait :) Oh, BTW, I guess there is no need to mention that all those territories are very approximate so few km there or there won't change a thing... Renata 19:05, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'd like to have such map for Latvian wikipedia, could you provide textless map when you've done it (or I can give you Latvian translations) ? I can provide you more reference maps if you need. -- Xil/talk 00:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would be happy to translate any map into any language. If you have additional reference maps, Xil, I would love to see them. Either upload them here at Wikipedia, or send them to my email address. The more sources, the better. MapMaster 03:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Latvian translation for your map:

Lithuanians - Lietuvieši
Latgalians - Latgaļi
Prussians - Prūši
Samogitians - Žemaiši
Semigallians - Zemgaļi
Aukštaitians - Augstaiši
Yotvingians-Sudovians - Jātvingi
Selonians - Sēļi
Curonians - Kurši
Nadruvians - never heard of them, can't find either - would be nice if you could mark them as prussians in Latvian map
Skalvians - Skalvji
Lamatians - Lamatieši
Galindians - Galindi

I don't know copyright status for those maps, anyway I think links will be better than e-mail. They are all in Latvian, I have translated foreign and unusuall baltic ethnonyms and explained symbols for each map and hope you will understand, yet in some maps presumed states and cities of Balts are marked (or partly marked) - so just ignore what you can't figure out.

These are not exactly 10-12th century:

-- Xil/talk 12:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Latgalian territory is to close to gulf of Riga - Livonian territory is likely to have encompassed gulf of Riga, except for semigallian part, so Latgalian western border rather should be stright line, not reaching gulf along Daugava. -- Xil/talk 16:46, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the border back to the east. I was using Marija Gimbutas' map as a base for my map and she showed the Latgallians on the Gulf of Riga in 1200 (see page 23 here). Any other changes? MapMaster

Link doesn't work for me :( It's posible that livonians and balts lived together, but balts likely were minority and Latgalians are mostly seen as inhabitants of what is now estern Latvia. I know that Gimbuta is renowed archeologist, yet her view in this case doesn't seem to mach with view of majoroty of Latvian scientists. I think everything else is fine.---- Xil/talk 19:51, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I disagree with the map quite a bit, but since I am Ms. Nobody and Gimbutas is Ms. Somebody, I will have to live with it :) Just one simple request: could you add alternative name to Yotvingians, i.e. Sudovians. Thanks a lot! You rock :) Renata 03:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will certainly add Sudovians. I would also be interested in knowing where you disagree with the map: some boundaries, I would guess. MapMaster 02:41, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you really want to know... (1) Selonians seem too big. (2) Livonians had more territory along the Gulf of Riga (as Xil said). (3) Yotvingians crossed the Neman River. (4) Aukstaitians is written in a strange place. (5) Most maps I have seen like to separate Lithuanians as an individual tribe. (6) Skalvians are too long ;) (7) I thought Nadruvians are a separate tribe by itself. So that's that. But I mean the book is very authoriative and recognized source for info on Balts, so I don't really dare to argue. And it's not like everything is clear there (most things are just assumptions). I think I just need to get used to it. (btw, I changed the description to give full info, hope you don't mind) Renata 14:19, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion on map moved to commons:Image talk:Baltic Tribes c 1200.svg

Ok, names that aren't Latvian in your map and translation:

kilometrs - kilometri

miles - jūdzes

Dnieper - Dņepra

Neris - Nera

Nemūna - Nemuna

Narev - Nareva

Sėliai - Sēļi

Dauguva - Daugava

You have placed semogotians twice - so in modern Latvian territory it should be Zemgaļi instead of Žemaiši. I think "miles" is not needed - might be confusing and could you remove underlining of tribal names ? Title: Baltic tribes - Balti c 1200 CE - ap 13.gs. sākumu ---- Xil/talk 13:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Latvian map at: Image:Balti ap 13.gs.svg

It's great, Thank You very much! The title is "Balts circa begining of 13 century" "sākumu" is instrumental case for begining -- Xil/talk 00:28, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HI, I replied to commons (both English and Lithuanian versions). Thanks again! Renata 02:44, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]