Delist — →AzaToth 18:49, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Did you inform the creator of this map (Seav) of this delist nomination? --KFP (talk | contribs) 10:16, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep erm, it is a map, how much larger does it need to be? I find it "very" informative and useful, clear and precise. And above all highly encyclopedic. — Arjun 18:53, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per arjun - 940px is also quite close to the resolution cut off. Debivort 19:37, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delist. It's a map. Why should this be featured? ... --frothTC 04:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You're not serious, right? Maps are promoted frequently because they reflect the best work of the encyclopedia, and meet the criteria. Promoting them to FP also encourages the creation of new high quality maps. Debivort 10:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
IMO maps definately aren't FPs unless they're SVG, detailed, easy-to-read, and of an interesting area. Fails them all. --frothTC 19:39, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't detailed? The Philipines aren't an "interesting area?" Debivort 20:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The text is blurry and small. --frothTC 03:11, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Samll text makes for detailed text, almost by definition. And I think the text is aliased, rather than blurred. Debivort 17:06, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's highly unlikely that an SVG version can be created for this kind of map since the terrain/topography data is raster-based, not vector-based. --seav 23:28, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delist - While not terrible, wouldn't pass today. Not sure how much work it would be to trace an SVG version... probably too much with the terrain. —Dgiestc 05:05, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The terrain is raster data based on GTOPO30 so its highly unlikely that an SVG version can be produced for this map. --seav 12:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This map has been nominated for delisting before. The result is keep with the recommendation that a higher resolution version be made available. I still have to create that version. --seav 12:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is our only Wikipedian-created map with topographical data. howcheng {chat} 19:33, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep You can easly see where the cities are.Bewareofdog 22:41, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delist. While useful, this map does not particularly strike me as "the best" that Wikipedia can offer. If it's replaced with a scalable version, change my vote to keep. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 19:56, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
At the risk of being repetitive, a scalable version of this map is unlikely to be made because the topographic data is raster-based. --seav 16:09, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Well done map showing major physical features. Keeping might also inspire others to create similar maps for other countries. --Polaron | Talk 02:27, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
