Talk:World map (1900)

There's a slight error in the Louisiannan border. On this map if you look at the border of Louisianne, you can see just above the word Reino there seems to be a triangular peice set off by rivers/lakes. This area was bought from Tejas in 2003, and should be part of Tejas in 1900, but possibly considered a disputed area, as that was the reasoning for Louisianne buying it in 2003. The area to remove is basically the Alpes-Argentés. BoArthur 07:12, 23 August 2006 (PDT)

Thanks for pointing that out. Are there any other mistakes with the map? If so, please let me know so I can correct it. --Sikulu 06:55, 24 August 2006 (PDT)

Thank you for creating this map! I was thinking about creating historical world maps myself, but I delayed that so that all errors/unknown things could be corrected on the map of the current world and therefore in case it would be turnout that there is some error on that map there would be no need to fix similar error on many maps simultaneously. Anyways, I do believe that at this time most inaccuracies were already corrected on the main map, so the creation of historical maps based on that map is already possible and this is a good start. Regarding inaccuracies on this map, Maasai at this time was not a state as such but rather a tribal zone that served as a borderland between Ethiopia and Chinese lands. Native States and perhaps also other states in the Middle Africa were as well a collection of many smaller tribal lands until the Second Great War and Ethiopian-powered unification. This particular thing might be left as is for now though as there was no particular decition and I am unsure how to mark tribal areas (perhaps with bolded words so that it would be clear that this is a region rather than a single state?). Came Rao was somewhat smaller to the north and those lands were part of Dalmatian colonies (see the map at Ashanti); they were added to Came Rao after the Second Great War however. Abdul-aziz 03:53, 25 August 2006 (PDT)

Thanks for all that. Since I'm mostly interested in the historical side of IB (and the fact that I study history a lot), I thought that I'd make a few historical maps. Also, I've got a world map of IB in 1898 on the go, so I'd be happy for any particular input (specificaly, how I should colour Mueva Sefarad; any other assistance would help). --Sikulu 07:11, 25 August 2006 (PDT)

Regarding colouring, I think some agreement needs to be reached about the disputed territories. I would personally suggest colouring disputed territories as disputed territories (i.e. in gray) only if they are actually regarded as disputed territories by both sides of the conflict or actually not controlled by any state of the dispute (that is, they are for example uninhabitted or very sparsely inhabitted desert areas or islands claimed by two or more nations), while in the situations where one country has full control of an area, claims the area as its integral part and the area is recognised as such by many foreign countries and another country disputes it another style of marking could be used - it might be some line of different colour to delimit the borders of claim or there might be no marking at all and the area would then be shown as a part of the country that de facto rules it. As far as I understand, this is a common practice in maps.

Another suggestion regarding colouring would be to avoid (if possible) using relatively similar colours for countries close to each other (e.g. Ottoman Empire, Greece and Cyprus in this case).

I am not sure if the map of 1898 would differ much from that of 1900. The maps of 1925 (interwar), 1945 (the height of war), 1955 (postwar) and such would be very interesting however. If you would do an interwar map, I would note that the area of disputed Nubia would be a bit different from Nubia nowadays (see Ethiopia for a map). It was not yet established what the claim was in 1900 however I believe.

The name of Yemen is written in italic, but it is not explained colony of what country it is.

I wonder what that small circle in the east of Sakhalin means - probably it is a mistake. Abdul-aziz 07:40, 25 August 2006 (PDT)

I decided on 1898 because after the War of 1898, several Castillian territories became independent. Thanks for pointing out Yemen, that's supposed to be in non-italic. Also, the circle to the east of Sakhalin is a "D". --Sikulu 07:46, 25 August 2006 (PDT)

Ok, I've made the recomended changes, and clarified some areas. Are there any other changes that could be recomended? --Sikulu 03:38, 26 August 2006 (PDT)

P.S. I probably will be doing some more historical maps (I was thinking of starting with 2003, then 1980). I will take 1925, 1945 and 1955 into recomendation (1940 might be good too). Are there any other suggestions for dates (preferably not before 1898 (at least, not yet))? --Sikulu 03:44, 26 August 2006 (PDT)

I see. As for navigation, if there will be more maps separated by just several years or a single war/event, I think in the fields "Next map" and "Previous map" there could be an explaination of what event(s) inflicted the changes in the respective maps, as otherwise it might be quite hard to notice the changes because the maps show the whole world and changes are usually only in some particular part of it. In addition to this navigation bar once more maps would be created additional navigation banner might be added - the one which would let to scroll through the maps at a higher pace, for example, 25 years (1900-1925-1950-1975-2000). Another small inaccuracy that might be changed is that Maasai would have been larger to the south (as shown here: Apskritis) and the missing explaination of the abbreviation RTC. Abdul-aziz 09:07, 26 August 2006 (PDT)

Thanks for that. Will change those maps as soon as possible. Also, I have 1925 on the go at the moment, and will upload it as soon as I am finished (which should be later this week). --Sikulu 08:35, 29 August 2006 (PDT)