Category talk:Map projections: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 15:12, 18 September 2015

Geography Category‑class

This category is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography 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.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography articles

Category This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

WikiProject Geography To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : See Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places and Missing articles about Locations
Assess : Tag related article talk pages with {{WikiProject Geography}}. To help assess the quality and importance of geography articles, please see: Unassessed geography articles and Unknown-importance geography articles.
Cleanup : See Geography articles needing attention
Deletion sorting : Listed at Geographic related deletion discussions
Geographical coordinates : See Articles missing geocoordinate data by country
Infobox : See Geography articles needing infoboxes
Map : See Wikipedia requested maps
Notability : See Geography articles with topics of unclear notability
Photo : See Wikipedia requested photographs of places
Stubs : See Geography stubs

Projections should not appear in both sub-cats and super-cats

The entries in sub-cats should not appear in the parent cat. That is the usual rule for categorization on Wikipedia. I will help fix this when I get the chance. Jason Quinn (talk) 08:29, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lacking information for lay-readers.

I've been looking at articles on several of the various projections, and most of the articles lack any explanation for lay-readers of the relative advantages and disadvantages of each. As a publication for the general public, it would behoove the writers, editors and others with expertise in these matters to add this information so that the rest of us can understand better what we're looking at. The geometric formulas are nice and all, but have no meaning to the general reader. I want to know in what way Mercator is accurate or inaccurate, and the same for the other projections. That information is lacking in many of the articles. 66.57.50.6 (talk) 15:12, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 The entries in sub-cats should not appear in the parent cat. That is the usual rule for categorization on Wikipedia. I will help fix this when I get the chance. [[User:Jason Quinn|Jason Quinn]] ([[User talk:Jason Quinn|talk]]) 08:29, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
+== Lacking information for lay-readers. ==
+I've been looking at articles on several of the various projections, and most of the articles lack any explanation for lay-readers of the relative advantages and disadvantages of each. As a publication for the general public, it would behoove the writers, editors and others with expertise in these matters to add this information so that the rest of us can understand better what we're looking at. The geometric formulas are nice and all, but have no meaning to the general reader. I want to know in what way Mercator is accurate or inaccurate, and the same for the other projections. That information is lacking in many of the articles. [[Special:Contributions/66.57.50.6|66.57.50.6]] ([[User talk:66.57.50.6|talk]]) 15:12, 18 September 2015 (UTC)