Difference between revisions of "File talk:Nationwide map.jpg"
(Created page with "To whomever is responsible for editing this map, could we correct the inconsistency using both Dukedom ''and'' Duchy? The other one worth addressing, though less of an issue,...") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
To whomever is responsible for editing this map, could we correct the inconsistency using both Dukedom ''and'' Duchy? The other one worth addressing, though less of an issue, is the inconsistent application for counties. Some are labelled "County of ____," while others use "___ County." While we aren't bound to it, the tradition is that the holding is named to reflect the title. For instance, the Duke of Waesche's holding would be the Duchy of Waesche while Duke Van Valkenburg's would be Van Valkenburg Duchy. If we aren't following that convention, then there is no reason to be using multiple approaches arbitrarily. | To whomever is responsible for editing this map, could we correct the inconsistency using both Dukedom ''and'' Duchy? The other one worth addressing, though less of an issue, is the inconsistent application for counties. Some are labelled "County of ____," while others use "___ County." While we aren't bound to it, the tradition is that the holding is named to reflect the title. For instance, the Duke of Waesche's holding would be the Duchy of Waesche while Duke Van Valkenburg's would be Van Valkenburg Duchy. If we aren't following that convention, then there is no reason to be using multiple approaches arbitrarily. | ||
Also, if the intent is to keep updating this, it's going to get crowded. It might be worth having two versions: one for geography, one for Peerage holdings. In the meantime, it's probably worth labeling the geographical features in black, and the holdings in dark red. Thoughts?--[[User:DukeBearPeninsula|DukeBearPeninsula]] ([[User talk:DukeBearPeninsula|talk]]) 14:59, 9 April 2021 (UTC) | Also, if the intent is to keep updating this, it's going to get crowded. It might be worth having two versions: one for geography, one for Peerage holdings. In the meantime, it's probably worth labeling the geographical features in black, and the holdings in dark red. | ||
Finally, if we're going to bother with licensing info on the image, we need to make sure it it updated whenever a new version is created. Otherwise, why bother with it in the first place? Thoughts?--[[User:DukeBearPeninsula|DukeBearPeninsula]] ([[User talk:DukeBearPeninsula|talk]]) 14:59, 9 April 2021 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 15:06, 9 April 2021
To whomever is responsible for editing this map, could we correct the inconsistency using both Dukedom and Duchy? The other one worth addressing, though less of an issue, is the inconsistent application for counties. Some are labelled "County of ____," while others use "___ County." While we aren't bound to it, the tradition is that the holding is named to reflect the title. For instance, the Duke of Waesche's holding would be the Duchy of Waesche while Duke Van Valkenburg's would be Van Valkenburg Duchy. If we aren't following that convention, then there is no reason to be using multiple approaches arbitrarily.
Also, if the intent is to keep updating this, it's going to get crowded. It might be worth having two versions: one for geography, one for Peerage holdings. In the meantime, it's probably worth labeling the geographical features in black, and the holdings in dark red.
Finally, if we're going to bother with licensing info on the image, we need to make sure it it updated whenever a new version is created. Otherwise, why bother with it in the first place? Thoughts?--DukeBearPeninsula (talk) 14:59, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
