Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Delaware and Hudson Canal/map

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Delete Polargeo (talk) 12:56, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delaware and Hudson Canal/map[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article is only a large picture. ~ QwerpQwertus · Contact Me · 02:46, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I think somebody was trying to make a subpage in the mainspace. ~ QwerpQwertus · Contact Me · 05:34, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - This page was made intentionally in response to a need: the map that was added to the Delaware and Hudson Canal article, when displayed as a thumbnail, was criticized as not showing clearly the route (in the thumbnail). Also, the full map is designed for viewing at a larger scale than is normally displayed on the media page (which usually scales images down to 550px). Since the map is also an SVG, when a user clicks on the image in the media page, the original SVG is returned, and most browsers appear to hang while processing the SVG. So in order to provide a separately created thumbnail image that shows the route, and also to provide a link destination for the thumbnail which shows the expanded map, the full-scale map was put on a subpage of the article so that users could click on the thumbnail in the original article, and arrive at the full scale map without having their browsers hang or be confused by the options on the standard SVG media page (which contains options only expert users know how use).

I'll try another workaround to the problem, such as converting the SVG to an PNG, and linking directly to the full PNG. Although SVG seems to the the preferred format for maps, the format has too many problems that prevent its widespread use. —Jim Irwin (talk) 10:47, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:10, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - as soon as this file is converted, the AfD should be closed. Bearian (talk) 00:11, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.