This page uses content from Wikipedia and is licensed under CC BY-SA.

Template talk:GeoTemplate

WikiProject Geographical coordinates
WikiProject iconGeoTemplate is of interest to WikiProject Geographical coordinates, which encourages the use of geographical coordinates in Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
WikiProject Microformats
GeoTemplate is part of, or of interest to, WikiProject Microformats, which encourages the deployment of microformats in Wikipedia, and documents them in the article space. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.

Frequently asked questions (FAQ)
Q: Which World Geodetic System is used?
A: Wikipedia uses the WGS84 datum ellipsoid for all coordinates, which is also used for GPS. This model can vary as much as ±100 m when compared to the geoid, which represents mean sea level.
Q: How can I report an error?
A: Report it on this page, with this link.
Q: Why do I see two markers on Google Maps?
A: Google Maps has introduced a reverse-geocoding feature, which gives priority to the closest object in their database, instead of the desired coordinates. The closest object is shown with a bright red marker with the map centered on it, and the requested coordinates are given a green marker that often blends into the background or is outside the displayed area. It might be called the "you must have meant this" feature. Our use of the Google Maps KML generator for Google Earth links is also affected. That's not something that can be fixed here.
Q: What is "UTM"? Does it use the WGS84 geoid?
A: UTM stands for Universal Transverse Mercator which is a map projection. Maps using UTM are usually based on WGS84 but, notably, the Ordnance Survey grids for Great Britain and Ireland are based on slightly different geoids: OSGB36.
Q: How can I get to Google maps quicker?
A: A user script is available, but easiest is to use WikiMiniAtlas. Click on the the blue globe to the left of the coordinate link will open a frame with a map of the surrounding location populated with Wikipedia articles.

Other common questions? edit

Add vanilla GeoHack link to the list of maps

GeoHack itself deserves to be in the list.

Not just for Antipodes.

But one would think "why would I need the link if I am already looking at it (in the URL bar)?"

Well, otherwise it takes a lot of experiments to figure out the basic GeoHack URL could be as simple as


I.e., [] (decimal degrees, no DMS mess too.) Jidanni (talk) 20:05, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

OK, call it a "Basic GeoHack (with only LAT LON)" Jidanni (talk) 20:08, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Link to LROC Quickmap as new mapping provider for Lunar locations.

I suggest LROC Quickmap by Arizona State University as an addition to current external mapping providers. It is official, feature rich with many data layers and has very easy URL defined format to create links like following URL creates a point location to 33.33°N, 33.33°W but polygons and paths can also be defined to mark regions, rover tracks, abstract features etc.


Quickmap has many map projections methods like Orthographic(far side, near side, south and north pole), Equidistant cylindrical and 3D globe which can be useful for certain locations, for example polar locations are better visible in orthographic projection compared to 3D globe and Equidistant cylindrical.  Ohsin  16:06, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

I added it, but didn't find any documentation for the parameters. Try the coordinates for the Apollo 17 landing site here and select the Lunar Globe (3D) projection to see odd movement of the marker when zoomed in and panning the globe. —EncMstr (talk) 23:07, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
Thanks and yes added points do appear to be floating in 3D views I have submitted a bug report. I'll update if they reply. No issues in 2D projection though.  Ohsin  06:38, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Protection note

Following up on a request on my talk page: (Special:PermaLink/921775139#Please_adjust_page_protection). This is a rather special style of template, it is fully move protected as it is called from external sources thus the full-move protection; it has been the subject of vandalism which can also be very disruptive, thus the unusual ECP protection. I may have otherwise used TPROT edit protection - but it has routine good faith maintainers and this is an anti-vandalism control. — xaosflux Talk 20:27, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Xaosflux If it's been under ECP due to disruptive editing, then simply reapply ECP to the page with the rationale "Persistent Vandalism" like so many others. There's no need for further justification/conflict/WP:IAR/"this is a special case"/etc. ECP was indeed created to prevent such disruptive editing. All that needs to be done is change your rationale. Buffs (talk) 15:49, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
This discussion should suffice, make-work log entries are not necessary. See also my note at my user talk if you want to escalate my actions further. — xaosflux Talk 15:55, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
Xaosflux make-work log entries are not necessary You've spent FAR more effort on responses than it would take to simply label your rationale correctly. Furthermore, you requested we continue the discussion here. Now it's back to your talk page to refer it further to WP:ANI. Why the wild goose chase? Why not simply update the rationale so there's no confusion in the logs? Buffs (talk) 16:12, 18 October 2019 (UTC)