Talk:Grosse Pointe Shores, Michigan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Michigan / Detroit  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Michigan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Michigan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Detroit task force.
 

Misleading Map[edit]

The map shows GP Shores as being much larger than it is. The land area of the Shores is tiny (I don't see much point in depicting the water area that "belongs" to the city in red, since it isn't inhabited). Funnyhat 19:11, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I think you're right. The Census Bureau map clearly shows most of this as water. I left a note for the map creator at User talk:Arkyan. olderwiser 01:04, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
The maps are designed to depict the city boundaries, and unfortunately some of the cities bordering the lake have boundaries that technically reach out in to the lake. I had considered the issue of the boundaries being somewhat confusing, but by picking the shoreline as the city boundary then we are being equally misleading by not representing the true boundaries of the city.
The question it brings up is - do we want the maps to be technically accurate according to the legal boundaries (technical definition) or cut it off at the shoreline (practical definition)? Let me know (and if you can get some more opinions that'd be great) so I can fix them if necessary. Arkyan(talk) 05:32, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
IMO, the "technical" definition is meaningless for most people. For all practical purposes, a city ends at the shoreline. Whether the city claims jurisdiction over the water area is mostly irrelevant for people who are unable to walk on water or build homes on the water. There was a somewhat related discussion on Talk:Michigan about whether including Michigan's water area to determine it's ranking among states was misleading. I don't know how hard it would be with the maps, but if you could show where the shoreline is and shade the water area a little differently, that might make things clearer all the way around. olderwiser 10:29, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
I've uploaded a newer version for this map. Tell me what you think. Arkyan(talk) 15:56, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
It's better, though it is unclear what the gray shading vs. white in the other parts of Wayne County signify. olderwiser 00:33, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
It is to differentiate between incorporated cities (and villages in the case of Michigan) from unincorporated communities. This distinction is somewhat confounded by the fact that Michigan has multiple levels of local government - cities, villages, charter townships, townships, and so on. If it is unclear then it can be mentioned on the summary information for the map, but I am hesitant to modify the scheme used to draw the map as the gray = incorporated is the standard that has been used thus far in other city/county boundary maps of this nature elsewhere, and I believe consistency is important. Arkyan(talk) 16:08, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

City Versus Village The village hasn't officially become a city yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.213.87.105 (talk) 22:18, 20 March 2009 (UTC)