Image talk:IndiaTest.png

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

/Archive1 - discussion related to the older map.

Contents 1 New States map 2 Request for comments 3 New Version 4 Aksai Chin & Arunachal Pradesh

[edit] New States map

Cool map Ankur, here are some suggestions:

• Nepal and Bhutan seem like Indian states, this should be remedied.
• I would prefer to see all foreign countries coloured grey so that it gives a contrast to the states.
• The external boundary of India must be darkened
• is it possible to add some more islands to Lakshwadeep?
• I would prefer to see the same blue you used for the sea in the first India map. That was a soothing colour.
• It may be difficult to add tiny details but is it possible to add Yanam and Mahe to the map?

Nichalp 19:38, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, good thing you liked it. I have not yet completed the map, thanks for the suggestions, what I want to know though is something to do with international boundaries, I am about to write down what I exactly want to know. Details like colour, rivers, latitude etc.. later. After we have discussed those questions I will finalize the boundaries and then start the rest of the work. As of now - anything and everything can be changed. Once the international boundaries are final well work on other issues. Thanks again --Ankur 19:46, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I think two maps should be made. One to replace the current POV maps present in the state pages and another to for rivers, latitudes etc.

Boundaries: The international boundary should be dark. The LoC can be dashed, but the boundary of Kashmir in China/Pak should be dotted. Similarly the Chinese claim to Arunachal Pradesh should be dotted in the same colour. Nichalp 20:26, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Request for comments

THE FOLLOWING TEXT DOES NOT APPLY TO THE CURRENT IMAGE

There are 10 colours I have used for boundaries.

• 1: Boundary of Kashmir - claimed by India, within Pakistan (provincial boundary in Pakistan)
• 2: Boundary of Kashmir - claimed by India, ceded to China by Pakistan.
• 3: LOC
• 4: Border not defined
• 5: Boundary of Kashmir (Ladakh) - Claimed by India Part of China
• 6: Line of Actual Control
• 7: Regions in Himachal Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh claimed by China
• 8: International Boundary (disputed) [in light brown]
• 9: Disputed boundary of Arunachal Pradesh
• 10: Claimed by China

What I want to know is this - should I use the same colour scheme which was used earlier, ie. parts of India under Chinese or Pakistani control should be within Indian borders but in colours of Pakistan and China, or should I use shaded regions (somethine like what I used in the map)? What about the disputed borders? Should I continue to show them as international borders or should I colour them different? I can not make dotted borders - I can change colour, I can change thickness and I can use lines with a different outer colours. About areas in India claimed by China what about shading of the area? Should I use the scheme used here [1] [2] [3] (again - I can't do dots and dashes - I dont know how to) --Ankur 20:38, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

About states - I'll upload new maps for states. --Ankur 20:43, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Another thing - make rough changes and re-upload DisputedBoundariesIndia.png that will make it easier for me. --Ankur 20:46, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The scheme you used in the past was quite effective, I think, the line + shading scheme for Kashmir that showed both the Indian claim and actual ZOC's. The Arunachal Pradesh claim line would be a bit of a pain to represent on state locator maps -- especially the Arunachal Pradesh locator map :| -- so I suppose you can leave it out in those, and include it only in the "main" map. (Same as what I did for Aksai Chin on Chinese province locator maps, so it's fair :) ) And I don't think you need to bother about disputed borders...

Thanks for putting so much thought and energy into this, btw ;) -- ran (talk) 02:22, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)

You neededn't have overworked yourself over so many colours for the boundaries. Anyways its still a good map. One thing though, the LoC and the state boundaries have almost the same shades, it should be different. Nichalp 19:38, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] New Version

Just saw the latest version of this map, and I got to say: very impressive, especially the various types of borders that you drew. Keep up the good work ;) -- ran (talk) 02:31, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)

Why thank you, I wanted to do this for so long. Finally I could. Now, if Nichalp too is fine with the current version I will start working on other things. Ah, and thanks for the fairness bit ;) Now that you say so, good thing that I dont need to bother about disputed borders. I have made a slightly different border but I'll make it like normal international border now.

Since we want two versions. I'll work on a good design for locater map too. Thanks to the US Govt. I got good maps of states but if someone knows of any Public Domain or GFDL maps of districts as well, let me know. --Ankur 04:49, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I don't have any problems with the borders. Its perfect. An NPOV. Great work. Frankly, you needn't have used so many colours to outline the borders, but since you have already done so, I won't complain :) . Nichalp 19:34, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Aksai Chin & Arunachal Pradesh

Hi Ankur, do you think it's possible to contrast the two areas a bit more? After all their statuses are completely reversed -- one is claimed by Indian and administered by the PRC, the other the reverse. Right now it looks like both are either occupied by the PRC or merely claimed by the PRC, neither of which is true. -- ran (talk) 16:49, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)