Template talk:Location/2016

Geocoding page link

Currently icon links to Commons:Geocoding page. How I can direct that link to geocoding page translated to Malayalam (Commons:ജിയോകോഡിങ്)? Pls help--Praveen:talk 13:43, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

On top of Commons:Geocoding there is a link to Commons:ജിയോകോഡിങ്. Otherwise the best option would be to translate Commons:Geocoding using translation tool. --Jarekt (talk) 14:26, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

I know that. I translated that page before translation tool (The page is not added to translation tool yet). There is also a redirect from "Commons:Geocoding/ml". Actual problem is that if someone click the link from Malayalam Wikipedia, it lands in the English page. Is there any option to link respective languages from the script itself?--Praveen:talk 17:42, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Fixed --Jarekt (talk) 17:13, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Jarekt :)--Praveen:talk 14:44, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

headings for {{Object location}}

The definition says: In case of {{Object location}} template that might mean that we are looking at a South wall/side of the structure/object. I don't like the soft formulation that might mean. Prefer the straight that means. But, looking at a South wall/side means heading North with the camera ({{Location}}), more or less. This is disturbing and confusing. My proposal is to disallow headings for {{Object location}}. Even more as there are actually only few uses. And even less with individual values. --Herzi Pinki (talk) 22:35, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

•  Agree: headings for {{Object location}} don’t make enough immediate sense to be of any use. Any particular situations (like the inherent heading of some “aiming” items like windows or canons, or of linear structures) are more clearly covered by using text. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 04:47, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

• I agree they should be deprecated, or at least that the documentation should clearly describe any use-cases considered worth keeping. And some wording that advises use of the description field for other possible meanings would also be helpful. See my postings here a few months ago. Is there any way we can tell how many instances there are ‘in the wild‘ of this template with a heading parameter?—Odysseus1479 (talk) 06:30, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

•  Disagree I agree that it is not widely used, although more uses are found when you allow non-numeric heading format. In case of images {{Location}} is much more preferred than {{Object location}}, but users that use both should be just able to copy {{Location}} to {{Object location}}. In my mind it is a little like vector definition: {{Location}} defines it by providing starting point and direction, and {{Object location}} by providing ending point and direction. I am OK with any changes to the documentation to make it more clear. At the moment the heading definition text is the same for {{Location}} to {{Object location}} templates. --Jarekt (talk) 12:58, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

That sounds reasonable for an image file with an obvious individual subject, where there is a single camera–target vector, but that’s not true of categories or gallery pages including multiple angles of view—where I would expect this version of the template to be most often used. (Camera locations wouldn‘t make sense in those contexts either.) Perhaps the documentation should draw this distinction; would you object to deprecating the parameter for the latter applications?—Odysseus1479 (talk) 19:20, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I am all for depreciating heading info if used in category or gallery namespace. We might have some categories like Category:Stari Most viewed from north there category might have specific heading but that is quite rare. I think we should update documentation and may be run a bot to remove heading from categories like Category:Astronomical Centre Rijeka. --Jarekt (talk) 19:50, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

to disallow/discourage heading on categories and galleries would be an improvement. --Herzi Pinki (talk) 12:51, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

I cannot follow your idea of considering {{Location}} and {{Object location}} on an image defining a vector AND allowing heading on both. It will overdetermine the system and could help to find geometric errors we would not have without heading. Ok, we could run some plausi to find inconsistencies, if there were enough heading values. In my experience copying of {{Location}} or manual determination is error prone, users are even challenged with the difference between {{Location}} and {{Object location}}. --Herzi Pinki (talk) 12:51, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

• Disagree Theoretically useful for Ships (Port and starboard), Statues (Forward facing), Theaters (Stage Left/Right), Airport runways (Direction of takeoff), Ski ramps, Waterfalls (presumably the direction of flow, not the staring direction), or the direction of home plate. This directionality is the reason I didn't flag it in my ghel reports. Just because people are unable to document it, doesn't mean its a bad idea. —Dispenser (talk) 02:26, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

I fear there are two contradicting semantics around: the south side of a building has a heading S, while the heading of a runway could have any heading. In case of a statue it could be the statue is heading (facing) S or it is the side of the statue shown on the photo (maybe the back side) heading S. If heading for {{Object location}} is kept, documentation should be precise and not encourage both semantics. If I would have to decide, I would prefer to give heading of objects the meaning of the direction the object is moving, or the direction, other objects are moving on the object (planes, cars) (as Dispenser argued) and not the meaning of heading (as Jarekt argued). This will also remove overdetermination. For waterfalls, I would not add heading, because it is always the same: down. :-) --Herzi Pinki (talk) 12:51, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

{{Object location}} has been around for a long time and so far the meaning of heading meant only one thing: the heading of the camera, so is a photograph has both {{Location}} and {{Object location}} than headings are the same. This definition makes little sense for categories unless you have category like Category:Chillon viewed from north which has specific viewing direction. I do not think we should change the current definition written in Template:Location/attribute documentation, but we can clarify it if needed. We can also add something about discouraging usage of "heading" in category namespace. Last week I looked through all usages of "heading" in categories and removed it if it was not valid. --Jarekt (talk) 14:26, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, hopefully the default for objects is now "no heading at all". –Be..anyone 💩 02:14, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Edit request: Heavily used template

{{Edit request}} Please add <noinclude>{{heavily used template}}</noinclude> to the top of this high use template (example). Riley Huntley (talk) 08:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

 Done --Jarekt (talk) 13:23, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Error

Hi, it seems that the direction is not shown properly anymore... i am seeing some text instead "Compass-icon bb...". Please fix it. --Arnd (talk) 16:43, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

I also noticed this, see for example File:Domprovstegården_name_plate_Viborg_2016-04-01-6014.jpg. The location template there has been generated using the Geolocator tool mentioned on COM:GEO. -- Slaunger (talk) 16:55, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Jarekt, did you or someone else change something in a related module or template? --Arnd (talk) 19:48, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Resolved@Aschroet: I went through the related modules/templates and corrected the error. Riley Huntley (talk) 20:19, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata

Hi all, is there a version of this template that takes the coordinates from Wikidata? --Arnd (talk) 15:37, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Not at the moment. How would it be used? --Jarekt (talk) 17:12, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

I just think that it would be helpful to have geographical categories with coordinates. When properly linked the Wikidata coordinates could be used as category coordinates. See also Commons:Village pump#Many categories lacking latitude/longitude. --Arnd (talk) 18:20, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi Jarekt and others. Some time ago User:ԱշոտՏՆՂ helped me to create a prototype that shows how a category can be enriched by the coordinates from Wikidata. It should be added to each category with a connected Wikidata item that also contains coordinates. Of course, before the layout must be aligned. Do you think it would make sense to continue this approach? Best regards, --Arnd (talk) 17:16, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

• There are 135k categories (https://tools.wmflabs.org/autolist/index.php?language=en&project=wikipedia&category=&depth=12&wdq=claim[625]%20AND%20link[commonswiki]&pagepile=&wdqs=&statementlist=&run=Run&mode_manual=or&mode_cat=or&mode_wdq=not&mode_wdqs=or&mode_find=or&chunk_size=10000) that benefit from it. --Arnd (talk) 18:27, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Arnd, I am working on Category:Wikidata access templates. Now {{Data|item=Q90|property=P17}} gives "France" as "country" of "Paris", but {{Data|item=Q90|property=P625}} which should return geocoordinates of Paris does not work here or on wikidata. I am sure we will be adding Wikidata to many templates including this one, but this seems like it might be more tricky. --Jarekt (talk) 17:42, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

You can get latitude with {{#invoke:Wikidata|formatStatementsE|property=P625|item=Q90|displayformat=latitude}} (same for longitude). I think the most convenient solution is to make use of that in Module:Coordinates. At least it is how I did it in frwiki. --Zolo (talk) 21:34, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

{{Location}} family of templates can take now an optional "Wikidata" parameter which is an alternative to lat/lon. For example {{Location/sandbox|wikidata=Q90}} gives

Camera location	0° 00′ 00″ N, 0° 00′ 00″ E	View all coordinates using: OpenStreetMap

for Paris location. It is also used at Category:Paris. --Jarekt (talk) 14:29, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Actually that makes sense in {{Object location}} but not sure it does in {{Location}} which is supposed to give the camera location: it's hard to see how the camera location can come from Wikidata.--Zolo (talk) 15:10, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

You are right. The only case I can think about are locations of some famous enough photographs to have their own wikipadia article or wikidata entry. Lattely I was working on documenting work many amazing arm-chair detectives are doing trying to find locations of WWII images. Many famous photographs from Warsaw Ghetto Uprising can be geo-codded, and some might have articles written about them. Same with moon landing photographs, etc. --Jarekt (talk) 02:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Then it should be coordinates of the point of view (P1259) - to be distinguished from the location where the photo is stored. One way of supporting it that would be through a wikidatataquery argument that could ovverride the default use of coordinate location (P625) in Module:Coordinates. I could do it but I was lazy about going through the procedure for retaining my admin rights, and now it seems that I am going to miss them... -Zolo (talk) 06:32, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Hm, two questions i have. First, would it make sense to add wikidata coordinates to all geographical categories? Second, why not taking the coordinates from the Wikidata item that is already connected to the category instead providing it as an extra paramter? Regards, --Arnd (talk) 17:07, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

We probably should rewrite {{On Wikidata}} or write new template to add coordinates to place categories, {{Authority Control}} to people categories. Also add Creator and Institution templates when they exist. May be even add up-to-date interwiki links. All with one wikidata q-code. --Jarekt (talk) 02:16, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Not working

Not getting me to Google Earth, for example in File:Blvd Bridge west arch jeh.jpg Jim.henderson (talk) 01:05, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Do you have Google Earth installed on your computer? The link downloads a kml file and (for me) computer asks whit what program to open it, with the default being Google Earth. --Jarekt (talk) 02:16, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

The ID entered is unknown to the system. Please use a valid entity ID

Could someone please look after this error which is displayed at the template page? --Arnd (talk) 14:11, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

 Done --Jarekt (talk) 11:51, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Altitude

Hi everybody, I am missing the altitude. Some people are already using the third parameter for it which leads to parsing problems when adding the heading, example. Is there a way to add altitude? --Arnd (talk) 18:20, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Altitude makes sense if you are flying otherwise you can always look it up based on location. I am fine with adding it for aerial photographs, but otherwise it seems unnecessary. --Jarekt (talk) 01:49, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

I know, but i'd like to see it in this template ;-) --Arnd (talk) 04:06, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

The question for me is, how to deal with the location templates that have three numerical values. If we do not want to use the altitude at all, we should delete it the third parameter because otherwise is causes problem as Category:Media with erroneous locations shows. It fills up because my Bot is currently adding the headings to the template. --Arnd (talk) 04:41, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

I would deal with them the same way you deal with any other template that is using wrong syntax: you remove parts that cause trouble. Alternative approach would be to add parameter "alt" or "altitude", which would be unused at this point, but might be used in the future. --Jarekt (talk) 11:44, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Ok, it think that i will delete them. If we once decide that we need the altitude we can add it for all files that have this information. Btw, i seems that even the UploadWizard added the malformed location template for some time. --Arnd (talk) 06:12, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Use Exif directly from file

Hi all, wouldn't it make sense to use the Exif data directly instead of extracting it and adding it to the template? --Arnd (talk) 05:06, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

I do not know a way of accessing EXIF data from LUA. I do not think I can even get file dimension or URL of the full resolution file. --Jarekt (talk) 11:52, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Can't LUA call the WikiAPI [1]? And, how is the Metadata section at the bottom of the file description is generated? --Arnd (talk) 04:54, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

That would be undesirable. Technically, all the information shown on file description pages could be stored in and extracted from the files' metadata, but EXIF data is frequently wrong and/or incomplete and can't readily be edited. Because of this, extraction to editable wiki markup is preferable. —LX (talk, contribs) 08:36, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Include OSM map

How about including an OSM map with the new feature (mw:Extension:Kartographer)?

It could look like this: 44° 28′ 52.43″ N, 10° 07′ 22.8″ E (OSM)

--тнояsтеn ⇔ 11:06, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

We already have links to 2 OSM based maps. If you look at

Camera location	38° 02′ 30.98″ N, 81° 01′ 28.87″ W	View all coordinates using: OpenStreetMap

and click "OpenStreetMap" you get to one OSM map and if you click the globe you get the other OSM map: meta:WikiMiniAtlas. Both are also showing location of other images. We could add a third link to OSM map, however it does not show locations of other commons images (or categories) and it is unclear why it would be better than the other two. If there is some advantage we should replace one of the current links. --Jarekt (talk) 18:27, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Jarekt - you are right - the existing Wikiminiatlas is an awesome technology, both visually and feature-wise. The problem with it is that it does not scale. We cannot show that map to all Wikipedia users - it will simply crash the servers. Also, Daniel, the author with whom I spoke extensively about it, is basically the only person supporting that technology, whereas there is now all sorts of very powerful open source technologies that we can use. If you click on the new map link, you will see how fast it pops up. There are already 20 servers serving the map, and there will soon be more. As for the features - yes, its a work in progress - we just launched, it takes time, but hopefully we will match and exceed the feature set :) --Yurik (talk) 00:47, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Yurik I agree that mw:Extension:Kartographer will be a good addition to this template, and I can work on adding it to module:Coordinates once we have consensus and some idea on how to gracefully include it. One problem with Wikiminiatlas is that it is really hard to find. Unless you know about it you are not likely to click in that globe, so I would advice against replacing it. The other OpenStreetMap link links to WIWOSM written by User:Kolossos and others. And I did notice that the new maps come up quite fast, but WIWOSM was equally fast. Maybe we should keep both of them and let users decide which one they prefer. Current wording View this and other nearby images on: suggest that you will see nearby images once you click, so it might not be the right place for it. On File:Adirondacks_-_Rolling_Pond_Campground_bouldering.JPG I was toying with the idea of converting {{Location}} into collapsible template, but I think it is a bad idea, since I guess the map will be rendered even if it is never displayed. We could wemove this wording and add more links to mw:Extension:Kartographer maps and may be to Google Maps again. I find aerial photography particularly useful when you are not in the cities. We could also replace words with icons, like we do in Institution:Glyptothek Munich and other institution templates. Any ideas? --Jarekt (talk) 02:48, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Jarekt, it is a blessing that WikiMiniAtlas is hard to find - it already works very slowly, and at times it was down for many weeks. The service that Kolossos built is also great (I need to double check where it is running - I might see him in the near future at one of the OSM conferences). But neither of them are hosted by WMF and/or cannot handle large amounts of traffic. They may both work ok if we have them as links, but we cannot make them into always-on frames - for two reasons: one is legal - we cannot show external content as part of the default page view without user's explicit desire to view it - for privacy reasons. Second reason is that most of these services cannot handle large traffic as generated by Wikipedia. Granted that Commons has significantly smaller viewership to significantly affect an external site. That said, I agree that other sites like Google maps provide a very useful service, and maybe there should be a way for users to customize their experience to easily access those services. --Yurik (talk) 15:40, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

I think I am convinced that we should use mw:Extension:Kartographer in this template. I am currently quite busy at rewriting {{Creator}}, and all the templates it calls in Lua and mopping up after conversion of {{Authority control}} to LUA. I will not have time to work on this template in near future. Can anybody else spearhead this development? I can help with final testing and roll-out. --Jarekt (talk) 18:34, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

I am pleased that the OSM map is available, as its information differs from what Google Earth provides when it is working. However, the template also promises to show nearby images. It does not, and they would be especially useful when the Google Earth link gives "502 Bad Gateway" as it has been doing in the past few hours. Jim.henderson (talk) 11:51, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

You are right Jim.henderson OSM tool on wmflabs no longer shows nearby images. I wonder what is wrong with it. --Jarekt (talk) 13:56, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Works for me. But it is not unusual that some tools are down from time to time. --тнояsтеn ⇔ 20:40, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Information about the mapping tools

The icon links the Commons:Geocoding page, however I can find nothing about the database for GaoHack there. Generally, I found no documentation nor discussion page about GeoHack. For example, I would like to know a system of updating of the database. Sometimes new images are displayed almost immediately in the linked maps, sometimes they have many days delay. Besides it, location templates should contain a warning about frequent (possible) failures of the map services. --ŠJů (talk) 12:04, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Finding nearby images

How can I find nearby or images from same location? I tried OpenStreetMap link on "Camera location" in file pages; but it gives only one another image from that location even when there are a lot of files/images available. Jee 03:00, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

I think the problem is that multiple images are encoded with exactly the same coordinates like this or this so their icons show up on top of each other. If your position changed even by a few feet while taking those photographs and your coordinates capture that than you will be able to tell them apart. --Jarekt (talk) 11:44, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

I understand. But that's only the coordinates of the park. We are not using GPS to mark every photo we takes. Jee 12:11, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

That is the problem. The {{Location}} template was meant for "camera coordinates" with default precision of less than a meter. You should use precision "prec" parameter to be clear that those are not accurate coordinates, but that will not help you with display. The only thing I can think of would be to add a bit of random noise to your coordinates the way I did with 2 images mentioned. Those 2 should eventually show up separately. --Jarekt (talk) 12:31, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the hint. It may not worth to add random noise to all my existing works. Will consider for future uploads. :) Jee 12:45, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Media containing EXIF GPS

Might be interesting to have a category with all images (or other files) whose EXIF data contain GPS data. I found only the template GPS EXIF but this is something else, and it will be removed after replacements by the bot. sarang♥사랑 10:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

there is probably a way to search the database by a query to find such files, but I can not think of a reason why we would want to spend effort researching and writing it. Sarang can you thing of potential use? --Jarekt (talk) 11:49, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. I was just thinking that we have categories for everything, and I missed that one. But you are right, the advantage of such a category is rather poor. sarang♥사랑 16:51, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Include OSM map (2)

User:Thgoiter, User:Yurik and others, I started to work on including OSM link, based on mw:Extension:Kartographer, to the template. For example:

Camera location	34° 05′ 32.36″ N, 116° 09′ 24.55″ W	View all coordinates using: OpenStreetMap

adds icon, using code: <maplink text="[[File:Openstreetmap logo.svg|20px|link=]]" zoom="13" latitude="34.092322" longitude="-116.156819">{ "type": "Feature", "geometry": { "type":"Point", "coordinates":[-116.156819, 34.092322] }, "properties": { "marker-symbol":"camera", "marker-size": "large", "marker-color": "0050d0" }}</maplink>, according to Special:ExpandTemplates. The link works just fine by itself, however inside the template it does not work at all. I will be gone for about a week, and it is unclear if I will have internet connection. Anybody wants to look at this for me? Pleas feel free to modify Module:Coordinates/sandbox as needed. --Jarekt (talk) 03:41, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Link works for me, map is opening fullscreen. --тнояsтеn ⇔ 10:53, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Looks good! Jarekt, is there a reason you want to keep both links to geohack and to the new map in place? Is there anything specific missing from the <maplink> that we need to add to offer a good replacement? --Yurik (WMF) (talk) 21:53, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Please do not delete the link to gehack! There are tons of services for specific purposes. --тнояsтеn ⇔ 06:02, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Yurik (WMF) about geohack vs. "new map". I do not have a strong opinion about it one way or the other. I am more in the function of a technical parson trying to follow the consensus. Removing geohack would be a "major" change and it would need to be discussed more widely and get more of a community consensus before implementing, since it would change the way template worked for a decade or so. I personally would vote for it as I think it is closer to what a new users would expect when clicking on coordinates link. If some users like тнояsтеn like additional functionality of geohack, we could link to it in some other way. I would propose to make the link available first so more people are exposed to it, before we propose to switch. We also would need to pay attention as not to break any bots that harvest info from this template. Yurik, one think specifically missing from the new map is what is provided by the other link to Wikimedia generated OSM map: location of all the other nearby images. Adding that would allow us to simplify the template by providing a single link to OSM instead of two. Strangely the issues I had with templates with the new link not showing up properly resolved itself. Before I have seen a lot of wikitext showing up outside of the template. Sorry for being offline for a week, I am back and will be responding faster now. --Jarekt (talk) 04:45, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Jarekt, there is some related discussion about it at phab:T145176#2784036 - I would love for the template to be simplified and only contain the most needed map/links. I hope we can contribute to the styling/usability of the template, and help community with it. тнояsтеn, could you elaborate the usecases that <maplink> does not solve. I would love for maplink to support all the ones that are frequently used by the community, but at the same time it shouldn't become a unmanageable collection of links and services that are not used by anyone - designers try to achive the "less is more" concept, where by providing only what's really needed, the service actually gains in usability and can continue improving. I even spoke with Dispenser (one of the main geohack maintainers) recently -- he did a lot of work trying to clean up geohack because otherwise many links simply get in the way of good usability. --Yurik (talk) 23:48, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

I like the idea of simplifying this template, but I also like to preserve the ability to get to where you want to get to with fewest clicks. For example current template is tapping into 4 different OSM based maps. The features I found two features particularly useful:

• One click access to aerial photograph based map with overlay of commons images, like Google Maps, Google Earth
• One click access to vector data based map with overlay of commons images, like OSM or Google Maps

I personally never use GeoHack (requires 2 clicks), or Proximityrama (see Category:Saint Basil's Cathedral for example), and I also have a feeling that not many people use Google Earth link. We could ask for people to vote for features the template was providing for years that they find useful. Another thing I like are links to objects in OSM, like the one you get when you click OSM icon at Institution:Louvre. I assume that many {{Object location}}s will be connected to Wikidata where geo outlines can be stored (maybe are already). --Jarekt (talk) 04:39, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Speaking about German GeoHack, I know that local servies are widely used. Topographic maps for US (ACME), Switzerland, Germany, Iceland, Japan and so on. Global services like WikiMapia, Bing (bird's eye!) are useful from time to time. Furthermore, links to different OSM services on WMFLabs (WikiShootMe, Commons on OSM, ...) shouldn't be neglected. There are tons of great map services for specific purposes. OSM and Google are not everything. --тнояsтеn ⇔ 07:40, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

new version of the template

I wrote new version of the template with several new features:

1. icon with a link to new mw:Extension:Kartographer extension based OSM maps
2. better integration with Wikidata which is mostly important for {{Object location}} templates used in Categories. When coordinates and wikidata q-code is provided we can

• detect cases when wikidata is missing coordinates which we can provide
• detect cases when there is a mismatch between Commons and Wikidata coordinates
• detect cases when there is a match between Commons and Wikidata coordinates

See for example:

local coordinates

Camera location	34° 05′ 32.36″ N, 116° 09′ 24.55″ W	View all coordinates using: OpenStreetMap

local + wikidata (matching)

Camera location	49° 42′ 32.73″ N, 8° 37′ 54.56″ E	View all coordinates using: OpenStreetMap

wikidata only

Camera location	0° 00′ 00″ N, 0° 00′ 00″ E	View all coordinates using: OpenStreetMap

Please review the new look and provide feedback. In most cases the template will not change at all except to extra OSM icon. --Jarekt (talk) 02:38, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Layout issues

How I see it…

I use Monobook with the typography “update” features turned off. The previous version of this template used to be set in the same font as the surrounding text of the page, but now it’s forcing on me some nighmarish miskerned mess instead — looks like Verdana or some such silliness. Can hardcoded typeface settings be taken off the envolved CSS or whatever blunder is causing this mess, please? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 18:38, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

I switched to monobook and the template looks fine (to me). I do not understand the typography “update” features turned off part. Can you elaborate and help me reproduce it? --Jarekt (talk) 18:54, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

I’m sorry I took so long to answer. Forget the bit about typography update, as it never affected Monobook, I was confused. As for the looks of the newly changed template as it gets displayed in mysetup, pls see this screenshot: While regular text and the orange warning template show in the same font (Arial — I know, I know!), the newly modified {{Location}} shows in a different, miskerned typeface — and tht should not happen. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 14:03, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

No param for elevation

The height above sea level is often an interesting property of a location; but the template does not yet have a parameter to show it. sarang♥사랑 10:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

We could do that, wikidata has elevation above sea level (P2044) property we could tap into and we could add a local parameter. So lets say Category:Salt Lake City has {{Object location}} template linked to wikidata and wikidata has elevation of 1,288±1 meters. We could display it in the {{Object location}} template but I am not convinced that it is desirable. That elevation does not mean much to me and will take space in the template and make it more cluttered. Elevations for individual photographs could be remarkably inaccurate as your phones and GPS units do not have a good way to measure GPS. Finally there is no big benefit to uploders to get it right or include it at all, no additional functionality is unlocked. --Jarekt (talk) 12:08, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

It may good for some organism photos as they only found in an altitude range. But only useful if can produce a search results based on a particular altitude or altitude range. Jee 12:15, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. The pictures about hiking pathes and shelters are somehow incomplete without the altidude. And when there is a geo-location, it would not be bad if it is mentioned there. BTW, when pictures contain EXIF GPS the altitude is stored with this data. Of course it can be verified with other sources. So I thought one more optional parameter might be fine; but I can live without it, especially when nobody else wants this expansion. sarang♥사랑 16:51, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

I do not mind adding it if there is consensus on the subject and if we come up with some clever way to display it. My current position is  Neutral. So if we decide to add it. How should it be displayed? For the reference {{Object location|Wikidata=Q1025253}} gives the following source code:

Object location	49° 20′ 14″ N, 22° 04′ 03″ E	View this and other nearby images on: OpenStreetMap - Google Earth

Can you two ( and other users) propose ways to add altitude? --Jarekt (talk) 18:50, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Altitude would be useful in our many pictures from an airplane window. However, phone and camera GPS fixes in that circumstance are much less reliable than on the ground. Jim.henderson (talk) 14:37, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

I have some pictures from an airplane window but I have no way of knowing the altitude for any of them. it could be calculated from cameras field-of-view, resolution and size in pixels of known geographical features. However I doubt anybody wou go through that kind of calculations to tag an image. --Jarekt (talk) 14:44, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Cat "Files with maps"

Hi everyone, seems that all files using this template end up in the mentioned category. What is it for? And why is it not created yet? --Arnd (talk) 20:14, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

It looks like Kartographer extension which was recently added to {{Location}} template adds those. --Jarekt (talk) 02:10, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Based on this patch: Differentiate tracking categories by namespace. Raymond 07:40, 3 November 2016 (UTC)