Jump to content

Talk:Oblique Mercator projection

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Cewbot (talk | contribs) at 01:12, 7 February 2024 (Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 2 WikiProject templates. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "Start" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 2 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Geography}}, {{WikiProject Maps}}.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)


The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Space-oblique Mercator projection is clearly a specific application of Oblique Mercator projection, I cannot see justification for two separate articles Polyamorph (talk) 07:56, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose Space-oblique has been around for over a decade while oblique was just created from a redirect within the past day or so, these are two separate map projections with differing histories and there's probably enough for two articles, but in case there is a merge, I think Space-oblique should be the parent article. SportingFlyer T·C 08:04, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Space-oblique is derived from the oblique Mercator projection, it is simply a special case. So merging in the opposite direction would not make much sense. Polyamorph (talk) 08:19, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's actually not specifically "derived" from oblique Mercator unless you're making a bad math joke - it's a separate projection completely (it was almost named "Colvo's Projection") and discussed separately as such in cartography. Don't see the need for the merge. SportingFlyer T·C 08:25, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
OK, poor choice of words on my part, but I think I can see your point. I'll withdraw the merge proposal. Polyamorph (talk) 09:06, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.