File:Serenissima.svg

per File_talk:Serenissima.svg#No sources Ранко Николић (talk) 22:15, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Adding the derivative map File:TratadoDeLondresTerritoriosParaItalia.svg. I don't know if it is correct or not; I'm only nominating it here to make the request comprehensive. --TadejM ^(t/p) 03:10, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

You can delete the whole Commons content and that would be even more complete. Whoever, if you had taken the time to check sources instead of suggesting removing useful encyclopaedia material, you would have found that the original map and my derivative one was roughly right (and any mistakes can be corrected without removing anything from the encyclopaedia): I understand suggesting deletions is something much easier to do, but I thought the point of this project was to build an encyclopaedia. So you can check https://archive.org/details/dr_italie-carte-25-dresse-par-th-weinreb-la-topographie-par-f-prudent-im-4730025 for the interwar border and https://archive.org/details/treatyoflondonit00tama/page/16/mode/2up and https://archive.org/details/agreementbetween00franrich/page/n5/mode/2up for the Treaty of London one and you will see our map is roughly ok. And if you find any errors, feel free to correct them. But do not delete anything on assumptions. Seeing no sources in the page does not mean none were used: it means none were stated in the page (different story altogether). Try hard proof of malfeasance instead. Or try to find one of those trigger-happy administrators so common in Commons and have fun deleting anything you like, they always find a "reason" to do so, of course. But I thought this was about creating an encyclopaedia? That's it from me, you can now do as you please with the map. But if you delete for some senseless reason now, I will no be adding any more content. Your choice.--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 17:37, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

A phenomenon concerning Commons cartography about history, is that any map that thwarts a nationalist point of view (e.g. showing a multicultural past where nationalist sources deny it) is contested under various methodological pretexts : "original research", "no sources" or, alternatively, if the sources are indicated, "copyviol" of these sources. When a digital map, created especially for Commons as this one, is enriched or corrected by other contributors, the COM:CROP rule is opposed to them for saving the nationalist point of view, as if the map were an ancient original document. In fact, a modern map is not an artwork but a PD-ineligible.--2A01:CB1C:821F:A400:C99F:C0BC:434E:35A5 08:19, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Yada yada. The factual accuracy of the maps is still disputed and the sources are still missing. The burden of proof is on the uploader. Allegations of nationalism are not helpful here. Claiming that anybody wants to delete whole Commons is utter nonsense too. --TadejM ^(t/p) 20:05, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Kept: No reason for deletion of this file. According to the Deletion policy a supposedly incorrect, original researched or not-neutral file is not a reason for deletion. This aspect should be addressed on the projects. The derivative file listed above is currently in use on the projects, so it has to be maintained. @TadejM: you could consider to add {{Fact disputed}} to the file page, or one of the other more applicable warning templates listed on the template description. --Ellywa (talk) 15:12, 24 August 2023 (UTC)