User:The Anome/Pros and cons of visible coord missing tags

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Arguments for and against {{coord missing}} producing visible tags in articles.

For[edit]

Why coordinates?[edit]

Core policies[edit]

  • Article about places that do not contain a clear description of where they are are missing possibly the single most important piece of data about that place; adding that information is an essential part of Wikipedia's core encyclopedic goal
  • Coordinates provide a verifiable citation to dozens of independent third-party reliable sources (maps, satellite photography, GIS databases) that can be used to verify the existence of, and correct location of, the subject of the article; see WP:V, WP:RS
  • Coordinates Wikipedia:Build the web by automatically allowing the discovery of nearby places

Benefits to editors[edit]

  • Coordinates make articles visible on resources such as Google Maps, and thus draw editors to articles, encouraging development of those articles; this is particularly relevant to geographic stubs
  • Coordinates allow the generation of new types of on-wiki resources, such as the miniatlas
  • Coordinates provide third-party reusers with useful information, can be used to integrate Wikipedia with GIS applications
  • Coordinates can help interwiki linking
  • Insistence on adding coordinates makes it harder to create hoax articles
  • Bad coordinates are self-cleaning over time; editors familiar with the subject can see at a glance that an article is in the wrong place when checking out the map link
  • The mere act of addition of coordinates draws editors to articles

Why {{coord missing}}?[edit]

  • Most articles aren't geotaggable, but hundreds of thousands are, many of which still need coordinates
  • Not all articles can be automatically geocoded from databases; those that can be, already are
  • {{coord missing}} helps identify and categorize the subset that haven't yet been coded by the bot, and therefore may need tagging by hand
  • Many editors are now adding these tags to articles when creating them, and removing them by adding coordinates
  • In addition, the geolocation bot can add these tags to articles that it can identify as taggable, but not code by itself
  • This is highly effective, with hundreds of articles now being tagged by hand each day, even without the tags being visible to all editors; this activity is already highly correlated with tagging activity, as can be seen from the output of Para's coord missing tool

Why visible tags?[edit]

  • Visible tags encourage the addition of coordinates to articles
  • With a backlog of tens of thousands of articles to be tagged, we need help from "drive-by" contributors; visible tags are intentionally a means to pull in general contributors with specific interest in the subject of the article.
  • It also draws the attention of personality types that are attracted to map resources and consider adding coordinates to be recreational
  • The visible tag makes the need visible to all readers, not just wikigeeks
  • The current process using invisible {{coord missing}} is currently removing ~250 tags a day; undoubtedly, visible tags will multiply that rate since all users will be able to see the need
  • Follows a convention established by {{orphan}}, {{wikify}}, {{merge}} and others
  • {{coord missing}} is discrete and occupies a space only ever used to display coordinates

Why not on the talk page instead?[edit]

  • Although it is generally established that WikiProject coordination tags should go on talk pages, instead of in the article body, this is not such an activity.
  • Coordinate tagging, like other forms of citation tagging, is not a WikiProject-specific activity; even now, the vast majority of taggers and tag-removers are not members of the geographical coordinates wikiproject
  • Adding inline tags to demand verification, such as {{fact}} and {{who}} is already standard practice, and is massively used all over Wikipedia; see Category:Citation and verifiability maintenance templates and Category:Inline templates for the wide range of such tags
  • If you put the tag on the talk page, you can't make it visible to drive-by editors, which defeats the entire point of visible tagging, see below
  • Putting {{coord missing}} in the article body allows category intersection with the main article category tree in ways that would not be possible if it was put in the talk page; this is invaluable for maintenance purposes, because the article category tree is much more fine-grained than that of WikiProjects, and relevant WikiProjects simply do not exist for many cases

Against[edit]

  • Visible tags make Wikipedia look unfinished
  • Visible tags clutter up articles
  • These should be WikiProject coordination tags, not in-article tags
  • Slippery-slope argument: if one Wikiproject can do it, why not every one? This will fill articles up with tags asking for extra information
  • No-one WP:OWNs articles
  • We don't want random people to geotag articles; they might add bad coordinates, let's leave it to the experts
  • The no free photo—do you own one? campaign for biographical articles (March–April 2008) was stopped for several reasons, generally summarized as being disruptive to the tagged articles; coord missing would be some fraction of that
  • Applying these tags to tens of thousands of articles is an exceptional change to Wikipedia, and should not be done without good reason

Counter-arguments to objections[edit]

  • Wikipedia is unfinished; the tags are there to help get it finished
  • Visible {{coord missing}} tags are small and discreetly positioned, unlike templates such as {{copyedit}}
  • They use space which is only used for coordinates, and do not take up any space within the article body itself
  • There is already well-established precedent for the use of inline verification tags and for the mass tagging of articles; many of the existing inline verification/cleanup tags are already used in tens or hundreds of thousands of articles, see for example {{orphan}}
  • {{coord missing}} tags are, in any case, self-eliminating, see above
  • If you don't want random people adding information to articles, you've come to the wrong encyclopedia project
  • Agreed, no-one WP:OWNs articles; issues should be decided on the balance of encyclopedic merit alone; see all of the above for discussion