what's the latest about map coordinates? [closed]

+4 votes

Pretty cool that map coordinates in either birth or death place datafield will take you to a Google map showing that specific location. But it looks weird.

A 2015 G2G discussion included a comment from Chris Whitten that indicated a separate map coordinate datafield was on the to-do list, but in the meantime, map coordinates should not be included in the place datafields...if I read that correctly (see [his comment in that discussion]).

So... currently the profile has the map coordinates in the death place datafield (but it shouldn't have?). Then I realized there was no support for where he died in the biography, so I added a Research Note to that effect... with the coordinates linked to the map that opened from the map dot by the profile's death place: map

Having the link in the text is not as immediately obvious/convenient as when the map coordinates are in the datafield, but it works ok.

Setting aside that there's no source given for where John Grey died, is it ok to have map coordinates in the datafield or not?

If not, before moving the coordinates to text, you can click the map dot & then copy that URL into the text with the coordinates for current use/future reference.

update - death in France is sourced.. I had searched for "France" with no result & a quick scan missed the entry. I've moved the URL with the map coordinates to be a footnote there:  d. 21 Mar 1421 Battle of Baugé, Baugé, FR[5][6]

WikiTree profile: John Grey
closed with the note: question answered
in Policy and Style by Liz Shifflett G2G6 Pilot (466k points)
closed by Liz Shifflett

1 Answer

+5 votes
Hi Liz,

Including geographic coordinates in place names is still not recommended.

Also, FYI, we no longer plan to add separate fields for geographic coordinates. At least not fields that are directly editable. We expect to automatically map place names to their coordinates. This is why we adopted the standardized place names used by FamilySearch. Usage of those standardized forms ensures that we can get the coordinates.

by Chris Whitten G2G Astronaut (1.3m points)
Thanks, Chris.  Does that mean wikitree is moving away from use of historically accurate place fields ?
Jillane - not necessarily. The standardized place names on FamilySearch tend to be historically accurate per political history at the country level (e.g., understanding that in 1707 "London, England" becomes "London, United Kingdom", etc.). But the FamilySearch naming conventions clearly do not scale down well to accurate names of local communities. That said, the automatic geocodes from Google Maps currently forced on WikiTree profiles for birth, marriage, and death constantly misunderstand historically accurate locations. I want to know how to either manually correct or toggle off these completely inaccurate hot links on profiles I manage.

Related questions

+10 votes
5 answers
+3 votes
0 answers
42 views asked Apr 12 in WikiTree Tech by Scott Davis G2G6 Mach 1 (13.5k points)
+3 votes
2 answers
112 views asked Jun 5, 2017 in WikiTree Tech by anonymous G2G Rookie (220 points)
+6 votes
1 answer
+16 votes
2 answers
216 views asked Jun 17, 2015 in Policy and Style by Norm Lindquist G2G6 Mach 5 (58.2k points)
+6 votes
4 answers

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright