Wikipedia:Peer review/Piri Reis map/archive1

Piri Reis map

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion is closed.

I've listed this article prior to nominating it for GA or FA status.

Thanks, Rjjiii (talk) 07:51, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Z1720

The "Interactive map" section is a little confusing: What is this an interactive map of? Normally, articles do not have this as a section heading, so I suggest renaming this to a better descriptor. Z1720 (talk) 16:42, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've renamed it to simply "translations" as it contains translations of the map text linked to those areas of the map. Hopefully this more clearly signals what is available in the section. Regards, Rjjiii (talk) 04:10, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Peter Isotalo

Articles about works usually don't include the full text. Exceptions for texts that are very brief, like the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. Not sure where the the line should be drawn for when text is included or not, but I get the sense that it might not be true to the spirit of summary style in this particular case. Have you considered moving the text to Wikisource and focusing on a shortened summary here on Wikipedia?

I did this myself with Anthony Roll. It's a much longer text than what's on the map, but the principle is kinda the same. Peter ^Isotalo 19:36, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When you say "full text" do you mean the photo of the map or the translated map inscriptions? It looks like most map articles include a photo (or sometimes a reproduction) of the map. Regarding the translations, I was inspired by seeing a few different translated maps online with errors [1] and Akçura's original transliterated foldout map. I could convert the translated inscriptions into a translated map image for the description section and expand it, but I'm not sure that's an improvement? Rjjiii (talk) 20:51, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm referring to the text of the transcription. Mostly just a suggestion. If you decide to keep it, though, I suggest using something other than Roman numerals as notation. It's pretty hard to read overall. Peter ^Isotalo 21:48, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That makes more sense than the other way. That set of Roman numerals are used consistently in scholarship on the map. I'll explore putting the translated inscriptions on Wikisource and creating a translated map image. It may take some time; do you mind if I ping you at some point down the road? Rjjiii (talk) 22:27, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Academics stick to a lot of conventions that aren't all that reader-friendly. 😏

I've done some work on various Wikisources so feel free to ping me on my talkpage if you need any help with the Wikisource bit. Some language editions might have different standards for what kind of texts they accept. Peter ^Isotalo 07:03, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, yes that's true. So far I have made an SVG translated map (without Roman numerals),[2] placed that into an expanded description section,[3] removed the old translation section, and tweaked the wikitext to work on Wikisource.[4] I now need to read up on Wikisource's hosting policies. I imagine they prefer the existing published public domain text. If so, I'll edit out all of my formatting and additions so that's just like it was in 1935. Rjjiii (talk) 20:34, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Updating this thread, but holding off on reaching out until I finish typing the scans in: I have done a PDF of Akçura's translation and notes, put that onto the commons, and began the process of putting it on Wikisource.[5] I was going to try and do all of the languages, but my copy is the 1966 reprint and while English is unchanged, the second language that I scanned (Turkish) had been updated and would be a derivative work not necessarily in the public domain. I'm also continuing to tinker with the SVG translated map. Rjjiii (talk) 07:41, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]