Talk:Global Mapper

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Maps Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Maps, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Maps and Cartography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MapsWikipedia:WikiProject MapsTemplate:WikiProject MapsMaps Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article had an importance automatically assigned to it. Once it has been checked by a human, please remove |autoi=yes. Software: Computing Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE. myleslbmg (talk · contribs) has been paid by BlueMarbleGeographics on their behalf. https://www.bluemarblegeo.com/about-us/contact-us.php

.

I created this page as I noticed that nearly every other GIS software application/company (ESRI, Manifold System, MapInfo, etc.) has its own Wikipedia page with a brief description of the history of the software application/company so it seemed appropriate to have one for Global Mapper as well. Please do not editorialize on this page, only list facts about the Global Mapper software application.

Mchilds76 (talk) 23:38, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the possible deletion, this page was based on nearly identical pages such as Manifold System that provide exactly the same type of information. If the Global Mapper page is not notable then neither are those pages, yet they have not been deleted. The Global Mapper page is provided as a description of the Global Mapper software application, just as the ESRI, Manifold System, and MapInfo pages are descriptions of those software applications history.

Mchilds76 (talk) 23:42, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You've forgotten something important- you need to add the independent sources. If this subject does indeed meet the notability criteria, then it has been written about or reviewed in significant computer magazines and journals, or in significant online sources. I used the proposed deletion tag, which gives you five days to make any changes you need to, because I thought you might just not realize that the guideline existed. Now that you've had a chance to read them, though, I'll go ahead and delete this article, since it doesn't include any such sources and your removal of the tag indicates that you think this article is completed and ready for review. If you'd like a few minutes to add sources after all, just let me know- I'll wait until 23:45 to delete. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:44, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MapInfo contains reliable sources. I agree with you that Manifold System is also inadequately sourced; I'll look to see if I can find sources to add, and if I can't, then I'll nominate that one for deletion as well. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:45, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just because other GIS software have articles doesn't mean this one should. Can you show any reliable sources provide significant coverage of the the software package. I have started to look and have not found any yet. If there is not any significant coverage of the package it will not pass the notability guidelines. --A new name 2008 (talk) 23:47, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've found three reviews to add to the Manifold System article- thanks for pointing out the problem! Have you found the sources for this article yet? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:52, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Give me a few minutes and I'll dig some up. This is my first article so I just based it on the Manifold System page and since it was not deleted I assumed what it had was adequate so I didn't go beyond that. One source is the USGS page at http://mcmcweb.er.usgs.gov/drc/dlgv32pro/ which is the USGS page for distributing Global Mapper (as dlgv32 Pro [Global Mapper]). Global Mapper itself has over 25,000 registered users worldwide, but I will find some good web pages that discuss it shortly. Should I put those here or in the actual article?

Mchilds76 (talk) 23:55, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You need, not the distributor, but the independent sources that have discussed it in detail. You can add them directly to the article's external links section, the way I did at Manifold System, if you want to do it the easy way- or, to do it the pretty way, see the detailed instructions at WP:CITE. (Examples of the pretty way to cite sources at Spore (2008 video game) -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:58, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I've added some additional links that I found very quickly and am working on more. There are also things like block/discussion forum posts like at http://www.cartotalk.com/index.php?showtopic=2670&mode=threaded&pid=14873 , http://www.evs-islands.com/2008/01/thoughts-why-i-use-global-mapper-to_08.html ,and other sites? Are those appropriate for the article even though they aren't official reviews but long user reviews or blog reviews? Mchilds76 (talk) 00:07, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, forum posts don't count- they have to be actually published somewhere, by someone who isn't paid by the people who make Global Mapper. (That's why I removed the press-release links). -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:09, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What about blogs? Do they count as published articles? Mchilds76 (talk) 00:14, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Blogs are self-published- anyone can create one. You can read the reliable source guidelines for yourself to get a better feel for what you need. -00:16, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I'll exclude blogs even though there is a lot of content there. I guess technically anything on the web would qualify as self-published since anyone could create a web site and call it a magazine rather than a blog. No problem though, I've added a few non-blog links, including a US government (US Geological Survey) paper which details the early development of the application as discussed in the article. Mchilds76 (talk) 00:26, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now we're getting somewhere! Wikipedia has these rules, of course, to keep from becoming a big directory of software no one is using. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:27, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Thanks for the all your help. Now that I know what is required I can keep that in mind for any future submissions. I'll also keep looking for other good links to add. Mchilds76 (talk) 00:35, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE. myleslbmg (talk · contribs) has been paid by Blue Marble Geographics on their behalf. www.bluemarblegeo.com

.