Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geography

Need some sourcing for Peruvian articles

A Peruvian town has shown up at AfD, and it appears that none of these towns may have acceptable sourcing. This one has none; some others I found are sourced to Wikimapia, which of course doesn't cut it. Given our constant struggle with bogus towns we really do need something, so if anyone is aware of something better than GNS we would like to know about it, or better still, someone can go through these and find some sourcing. Thanks in advance, Mangoe (talk) 11:29, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Problems with OS Maps in Geohack

There are at least two dead links for UK OS maps in the list, and several of the others have issues working for me. Is there someone who should be alerted to this? Mangoe (talk) 14:40, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

@Mangoe: In the left sidebar you should see a heading "Page actions" below which are some entries like:

• Template
• Talk
• Read
• View source
• History

The first and third are the same. If you're confident, go for the fourth one; otherwise, leave a message at the second one. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:09, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Got it, thanks. Mangoe (talk) 17:56, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Peer Review for map

A Peer Review has been created for the map article, as part of preparation for a WP:FA nomination. Any feedback would be appreciated. Noleander (talk) 22:53, 2 August 2026 (UTC)

The PR is now closed for map article, after receiving some good feedback. The article will be nominated for WP:FA status soon. If there are any geography experts interested in that article, it is not too late to provide constructive criticisms before the nomination. Thanks. Noleander (talk) 22:13, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Territorial changes of Poland immediately after World War II#Requested move 27 July 2026

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Territorial changes of Poland immediately after World War II#Requested move 27 July 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Fortek67 (talk) 14:41, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

Technical Report: Global Boundary Module Refinement (Mount Grammos Ridge)

The localized coordinate overrides currently applied to the high-altitude sector of the Mount Grammos ridge have caused a fatal compilation mismatch, resulting in a persistent server-side layout failure ("Script error: No such module Location map"). This structural lock-up occurs because the manual user-generated inputs cannot resolve mathematically with the global database core.

To restore technical stability and enforce strict platform metadata standards, the data must be permanently anchored to the synchronized primary geospatial frameworks of both neighboring frontier nations. The definitive state data layers confirm an absolute geodetic consensus that places the alpine basin containing Lake Gistova entirely within the sovereign territory of Greece:

- Official Albanian State Data (ASIG Geoportal): The State Authority for Geospatial Information (ASIG), operating under the supervision of the Albanian Prime Minister's Office, provides the definitive national geospatial framework at: https://geoportal.asig.gov.al/map/?auto=true. When activating the high-resolution 2007 20-CM Orthophoto layer and navigating to coordinates 567362.404 E, 4470179.392 N (Albanian National Projection System), the aerial imagery produced by Albania's own official agency clearly depicts the lake entirely south of the border ridge/watershed line, proving no Albanian boundary vector crosses or includes the water body. - Official Albanian Military and Territorial Planning Data: This boundary placement is unequivocally supported by the National Territorial Planning Agency (AKPT) via their live ArcGIS Web Application Viewer (https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=ff270e99f5be45f19c7b7a1e3e618b27&extent=2313524.2226%2C4918645.5462%2C2315293.0232%2C4919436.1917%2C102100), which excludes the basin from its administrative boundaries.

   Furthermore, the official, declassified military-grade charts from the Instituti Topografik të Ushtrisë (Albanian Military Topographic Institute)—archived and verified globally under the East View Geospatial 1:50,000 Scale Topographic series, where you can zoom in directly to inspect the features (https://shop.geospatial.com/publication/0K48DGWKGBQ44E21WWYBAJKMS7/Albania-1-to-50000-Scale-Topographic-Maps), and the 1:100,000 scale series (https://shop.geospatial.com/publication/38PCREFVGPMH4RPD0MSAVZHMV6/Albania-1-to-100000-Scale-Topographic-Maps)—confirm that the watershed line runs north of the lake basin.

- Official Greek State Data (Hellenic Cadastre): The precise parcel-level coordinate grids of the Hellenic Cadastre (Ktimatologio) confirm the exact alignment of the frontier line matching the high-altitude basin, visible directly via their dedicated GIS viewer platform: https://maps.ktimatologio.gr/?locale=el#widget_6=active_datasource_id:dataSource_1,center:2315771.2285014763%2C4919221.239006859%2C102100,level:15.138323635502697

Unilateral promotional tourism profiles, crowdsourced commercial tracking logs, and outdated consumer app rendering errors do not override sovereign legal baselines or bilateral international protocols. To preserve platform integrity, I request that the advanced administrative board review this technical file, clear the local template conflict, and lock the master mapping module strictly to these verified state cadastral layers.

Respectfully submitted, Aetolia Independent Researcher of Alpine Cartography & Geodesy Aetolia (talk) 08:30, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

Arctic Desert listed as second-largest desert/classification of the "arctic" as a desert in general

(This concerns mainly definitions of deserts and (in-)consistency among various wikipedia articles)

I recently came across the article list of deserts by area and the related subsection "Major Deserts" in the article desert. They list the "arctic desert" as earths second-largest desert with an alleged size of 13,900,000 km², apparently including most, if not all of the arctic ocean (The frozen parts are what is meant I suppose), as well as several of the surrounding Islands and land regions (Svalbard, Northern Canada, etc.).

Now I have multiple gripes with this:

1. The classification of the arctic desert as a desert. According to the desert article a desert is a "landscape where little precipitation occurs". Meaning there are two criterea to be fulfilled for an area to be called a desert. Firstly low amount of precipitation and secondly, the area must be a "landscape". A Landscape according to wikipedia "is the visible features of an area of land". Note that the "land" link given links to terrestrial ecoregion instead of land. Neither of those two links make any reference whatsoever to the frozen parts of the arctic ocean (or its frozen parts) as "land". It is also not listed as a landmass which it should be, were it considered land. Thus the Arctic desert does not fulfill the criterea, at least not in the way the articles I listed at the top indirectly claim it does. Which leads me to my second point.
2. There is an existing article on the arctic desert on wikipedia, that claims it to be of a totally different extent. It defines the arctic desert as " a terrestrial ecoregion that covers the island groups of Svalbard, Franz Josef Land, Severny Island and Severnaya Zemlya in the Arctic Ocean". A size of 161,400 km² is given which equals the combined size of the mentioned islands. It does not include any arctic ocean area in its definition. The "Arctic Desert" described is thus not one single continguous area but rather a collection of disconnected islands. Which brings me to my last point.
3. Given that under the exclusion of the arctic ocean ice, the surrounding areas claimed as part of the "Arctic Desert" in the article list of deserts by area are disconnected (which by the way also includes Greenland, Iceland, Northern Canada, Northern Russia, etc. in its description of said "desert", contrary to what the arctic desert article says), it seems illogical to include it as one desert. After all that would mean that any collection of deserts could be arbitrarily grouped together to form one larger desert, defeating the whole point of the article.

I suggest removing the claim that the "Arctic Desert" is the second-largest desert from all articles that make mention of it. I have no problem with the Arctic Desert article, but the way it is portrayed to be "one" desert across multiple other articles seems misleading and very inconsistent with the basic definition those very articles are giving.

As a followup if that were to happen the rank of all other deserts would then have to be adjusted meaning some additional articles would have to be edited (Articles like Sahara, Deserts of Australia, ... which refer to them as the x-largest desert on earth).

In my opinion this whole thing comes down to the definition of "land" and wether or not the frozen parts of the arctic ocean are included in it.

Btw I posted this issue to the respective talk pages and also looked throught their archives where i found some unanswered talk sections and one discussion whose participants seemed equally puzzled.

Pls answer, thx ~2026-43094-28 (talk) 16:33, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

You have a good point. Agree that the size of the arctic and antarctic deserts should only include their land area (that meets "desert" climate criteria). So sizes of both deserts should be changed to the land area only, in all articles they are mentioned.

HOWEVER: no changes should be made without first identifying some Reliable sources that state what the areas of those two deserts are. When the articles are changed, those sources should be included as (new) citations.

Simply removing or changing the facts/text (without including new, solid sources) is not helpful. The important work is finding sources and getting accurate info from them. Only after that is done, then edit the articles. For example, the Arctic desert article states an area of 161,400 km2. Where did that number come from? A source is required.

You (~2026-43094-28) are welcome to do the edits yourself, but - again - the key step if finding strong, reliable sources that state the area of those two deserts. After you have that: the editing part is easy. Noleander (talk) 16:51, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

Nomination of Timeline of national flags for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Timeline of national flags is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article is being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timeline of national flags (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may still edit the article, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the AfD notice from the article until the discussion is closed.

– MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 11:01, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello, Please note that Archipelago, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 31 August 2026 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team

Hi all, could anyone help me find an article that is similar in structure to the Archipelago article but is B class or higher, as a source of inspiration? Thanks! Hason-LEK-🇸🇬 ● 💬 ● 🧱 ● 🧪 04:56, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

@Hason-LEK-SIN Probably Sea, or Island. CMD (talk) 06:36, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

Nomination of Integrated geography for merging into Environmental history

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Integrated geography is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be merged into Environmental history.

The article is being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Integrated geography until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may still edit the article, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the AfD notice from the article until the discussion is closed.

~2026-45985-49 (talk) 02:52, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

RfC in the Portuguese Empire wiki page

Dear all, I kindly request your comment on the Portuguese Empire page, relative to its maximum extent. Thanks ~2026-51340-84 (talk) 16:41, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello, Please note that Geographic information system, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 28 September 2026 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team

Requested move at Talk:Calvados#Requested move 27 September 2026

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Calvados#Requested move 27 September 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ~2026-52515-80 (talk) 16:05, 30 September 2026 (UTC)