Commons:Deletion requests/File:Haplogroup Q (Y-DNA).PNG

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

File:Haplogroup Q (Y-DNA).PNG

No source or release for the underpinning global map. Must be verifiable per COM:PRP. Warning, file history shows multiple sockpuppet contributions per Category:Sockpuppets of WorldCreaterFighter. Fæ (talk) 16:38, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

The underlying map is my own, although I acknowledge that the quality of the underlying map can be improved.

Since I last edited in 2011, I have not reviewed the map. Therefore I am not sure if subsequent editions have improved it or if there are mistakes. Revising a map can take a while, and if necessary wrong edits can be reversed. But what can't be done is delete an own work.--Maulucioni (talk) 14:03, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello Maulucioni, for some reason, user Rsk6400 keeps removing your Haplogroup Q map from the Wikipedia page, claiming not enough sources for the Old World are cited. Yet he doesn't bother with removing the maps you made for Haplogroups H, L, N, and O. Not sure why he has such a vested bias in removing the Q map in particular.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hr8WDHUABYGjW (talk • contribs)

Claiming this is 100% "own work" appears unusual, considering one might have claimed a PD source. I am reading this statement including that is has been produced without the help of standard spreadsheet mapping tools, which create exactly this type of zonal map for 'hotspot' geodata against a standard selection of maps.

Examining the file overwrite history, remarkably there are three confirmed in the pseudo-geneology & race theories sock farm that have overwritten the file six times. Only one other editor was not a sock.

Files where the majority of edits are from one sock farm must have a high standard of verification to address the "significant doubt" threshold of COM:PRP. Consequently "I created a map of the world from scratch", just does not seem sufficient. --Fæ (talk) 15:34, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

By creating a B&W line drawing version of this file, to search for the underpinning map, I find matches in research papers such as doi:10.1002/joc.4305 Fig 4 (2014) which are subsections of this map at higher quality, and are exact matches of for detailed features such as lakes within continents. This shows the map is at minimum an unattributed derivative of a vector map used in mapping software. It's not an accident. --Fæ (talk) 16:51, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

There are several factors which weigh in favour of it not being a DW of this map. In the paper that you have linked there is actually a whole world map available, and it does have details, which are missing on the map that we have, but there are also details which exist on Y-DNA map and are missing in the map you have found, look carefully at Great Lakes at the border between the US and Canada, you will notice that the shapes are slightly different and Lake Nipigon is not even drawn by mansoon map. Yes, we should look at a file that was altered by many sockpoppets, but can se assume that every file that a sockfarm touches was a copyvio to start with? I say we cannot. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 17:20, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Overlaying the maps in GIMP shows the identical continent outlines, in this exact (unusual) projection and proportions. It is entirely consistent with this PNG being based on an exported vector file. The claim that the underpinning map is "own work" just cannot hold any water at this point. This is a copyright verification failure.

By the way, please make sure you are comparing to Figure 4. It is not a "whole world map". --Fæ (talk) 17:57, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

comment @Maulucioni and Fæ: Although it seems pretty irrelevant, I'll explain why I deleted Haplogroup Q and not the other maps: If I happen to come across unsourced and possibly harmful information, I often delete it. But I'm not searching for it systematically. I have no bias against Q, it's just that my attention was drawn to it. I don't remember exactly why, maybe because it's the first file on the list of contributions by sock Satoshi Kondo. --Rsk6400 (talk) 16:40, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Didn't notice earlier that the comment about my "vested bias" was an unsigned comment by Hr8WDHUABYGjW (talk · contribs). --Rsk6400 (talk) 05:25, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for linking the get started pages. A question though, if you have no bias against Q, then why haven't you removed the similarly "unsourced" H, L, N, and O maps? This is a question asked in good faith. -Hr8WDHUABYGjW

I have reviewed the map and indeed there have been erroneous edits that I have reverted.--Maulucioni (talk) 12:58, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

---

Kept: As I see, the user has created various maps here and is experienced in it, so, I don't see why we can't believe it is an own work. Otherwise, we should ban all maps here as no user would ever able to prove that creation of a map is possible at all. Factual mistakes aren't the reason for deletion while the image is highly used, it is to be addressed through the talk page. --rubin16 (talk) 12:52, 12 June 2021 (UTC)