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.
Numerous hard facts are represented within this image without a way to reliably source the file. Citations are needed for each country and region correlated by the color coding on this map. Advocates for keeping the file have not presented any way to adequately source this image here: Sourced(?). File is not useful for any Wikimedia project. User:Jytdog (Wikipedia) deftly summarized this issue:
"We aim to provide the public with accepted knowledge and the only way we can be sure this map reflects that is to have the citations to show it." --- Steve Quinn (talk) 04:58, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The map can easily be updated with information from the relevant English Wikipedia articles (which have citations), and the claim that the map "is not useful for any Wikimedia project" is nonsense—it is used on 32 projects. We have numerous maps and other files on Commons that are used to represent hard facts, and this is not a problem at all. —Granger (talk·contribs) 10:36, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The file should instead be removed from Wikipedia projects until it can be verified. I recently had to correct a significant error on the file, so I sympathise with the OPs argument here, it looks like a lot of guesswork and undermines the credibility of Wikipedia. This isn't a reason for deletion from Commons however, it's someone's work, even if it's inaccurate. A good option would be to make a new file in which every country coloured is sourced in the description of the file (even if that means most of the countries are left grey), and replace this file across Wikimedia projects with the new file. Rob984 (talk) 17:50, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: "until it can be verified" - this effectively means the map can't ever be used, if you insist it must be verified and re-verified each time a user views it. This burden is preposterous, the map cannot be kept up to date at every instance. Much better to have the map say "accurate as per January 2015" or somesuch, and then simply use it. CapnZapp (talk) 11:13, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Considering the wiki experience of both Steve Quinn and Jytdog, I'm flabbergasted why they make this move. It's an obvious keep, and their arguments are incomprehensible. I suggest SNOWBALL keep. CapnZapp (talk) 11:13, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The map can easily be updated with information from the relevant English Wikipedia articles (which have citations), and the claim that the map "is not useful for any Wikimedia project" is nonsense—it is used on 32 projects. We have numerous maps and other files on Commons that are used to represent hard facts, and this is not a problem at all. —Granger (talk · contribs) 10:36, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
