File talk:Myotis alcathoe range.svg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Source(s)?

[edit]

Hi @Ucucha: do you know which sources were used in 2011 to create this map? The description says "based on sources in the English Wikipedia article" but that's quite vague (and I assume the article and its sources have changed over the past 10+ years). The IUCN's map is also quite different. Thanks for any help you can provide. Best, A455bcd9 (talk) 14:59, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It should be the sources in this version of the English article: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alcathoe_bat&oldid=435387922#Distribution_and_habitat. The Distribution section lists detailed records of the species in each country with references. The comment above this section has the precise coordinates I used to generate the map. I haven't kept the map up to date since 2011 and surely there are more records now, but I doubt the overall picture has changed much.
I don't know what decision making that went into the IUCN map. I don't like that it shows big solid areas in a few places (France, Serbia) and single isolated records in others (e.g., England). The IUCN map has a big blob in Serbia but my map has no records in the country, though the WP article does say it had been recorded in Serbia at the time. Possibly the records didn't have sufficiently precise locality data for me to add them to the map. On the other hand, the IUCN map is missing records in Sweden, Galicia, Italy, Slovenia, and the Russian Black Sea coast. I don't know whether that's because they missed these records or because they didn't find the evidence compelling. Ucucha (talk) 04:26, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your answer @Ucucha.
The current map, although based on sources, is a mix of locations were "a large number of sites are known" and attested (e.g. in France) and some where "a single specimen was recorded" years ago (e.g., Slovenia). Or on the Russian Black sea coast where "Bats collected [there] may represent M. alcathoe". I'd suggest using existing maps (to avoid en:WP:OR and especially SYNTH?). We could merge the IUCN's map with other maps such as:
In the meantime I'll change the map on en:w:Alcathoe bat for File:Distribution of Myotis alcathoe.png that is directly sourced. Feel free to revert if you think it's not a good idea. A455bcd9 (talk) 09:27, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also: what about the updates made after June 2011? A455bcd9 (talk) 09:35, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure why the "mix of locations" is a problem? That's why there's one dot in Slovenia on the map and a lot of dots in France.
The Black Sea Coast records are in a different color because their identity was unclear at the time. The legend on English Wikipedia said so explicitly. However, since then these populations have been named as a separate subspecies, Myotis alcathoe circassicus, so it's good that I put them in!
The map you added isn't radically different from mine; it skips the Russian records and adds more in Montenegro, Spain, and (most interestingly) Asian Turkey. I prefer using a map with dots over one with contiguous blobs because the distribution of this species is still poorly known and the blobs may give a wrong impression of the state of its distribution.
It's definitely true that updates should have been made after 2011. I haven't been very active on Wikipedia for the last several years, and just keeping the articles I wrote up to date is a big job. However, I'll try to find some time to dust off the script I used to create the map in 2011, regather the sources and apply any updates. Ucucha (talk) 01:40, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Ucucha: sorry I wasn't clear. My point was that I felt it was a mix of locations with different status. Some with a lot of attested specimens confirmed by various reliable sources and some where only once in the past 20 years someone saw one specimen and/or with unclear status (e.g., "A single specimen was recorded in Slovenia in 2007, although it is not clear how many bats previously recorded as Myotis mystacinus belong to this species."). So I was afraid putting them together could constitute WP:SYNTH. But if you think it's not a problem and if you have all the sources to create an updated version of this map: go for it :) Thanks again for your help. A455bcd9 (talk) 08:10, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I translated my old code from PHP to Python, expanded my data file to include sources, and reviewed some of the new literature to update the map. Relative to my previous version, this map adds the first records for Luxembourg, Belgium, Bosnia, and Montenegro, and significant new records for Italy, Slovakia, Romania, Ukraine, and Poland. I added a new color for skull specimens identified as M. alcathoe from a cave in Germany. The new version of the script is also able to produce a report listing all localities and sources, which I have uploaded to the Commons file description page.

Still to be done:

  • http://www.swild.ch/publi/BLfU_Tagungsband_Nymphenfledermaus2015.pdf, the source for one of the maps you linked above, is a symposium on the species with several interesting papers that I haven't reviewed yet. The map shows a few records that are outside the range I have been able to document: one in Calabria, southern Italy, and two in Asian Turkey. I haven't looked for information about these records yet.
  • The UK source you linked above shows a more extensive distribution than what I have, but I'm not sure how much detail is available about these additional records.
  • @User:Totodu74 added some records in the France/Switzerland border region based on books that I don't have access to. I have removed them for now since they aren't in my data file, but I'd be happy to add them back given a list of coordinates.
  • One of the Polish papers expressed some skepticism about the records in Sweden, which are based only on echolocation records, not actual captured specimens. Should we give these records a different color?

Thanks for the encouragement @A455bcd9! Ucucha (talk) 00:22, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wow you did an impressive work @Ucucha! Thanks and congrats.
I added a legend template:
  • I don't understand what "cave material" means: is it another subspecies? We should maybe keep the color scheme for species? We could use shape (circle, rectangle, star, etc.) to distinguish something else.
  • Could you please replace green with another color that is more colorblind friendly for instance using the recommended Color blind friendly palette? I have some difficulties with the current one to distinguish dark green from red.
  • Regarding the Polish paper expressing skepticism about the records in Sweden: we could add a "?" next to them and add to the legend "?: contested records"
What did you use to generate the citations? For instance:
The PDF is freely accessible on my end so I don't understand why there is "subscription required". If you want I can reformat them all using {{Cite journal}}:
(wow Suren Gazaryan is impressive!)
(By the way, it would be easier if citoid was enabled here on Commons, I've just started a proposal requesting this: feedback welcome)
Best, A455bcd9 (talk) 08:08, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks!
  • The cave material is long-dead skulls found in caves, indicating that the species may no longer occur in the area.
  • I will change the color scheme and probably try to use different shapes for the cave records and for the Swedish echolocation-only records, but that will require me to learn a bit more SVG.
  • Didn't know that Gazaryan is also a political activist! Thanks for the link, I should try to work that into the WP article.
  • My references database doesn't store whether links are subscription-only, so I generate the references under the assumption that all links are subscription-only. That's not a great heuristic. I didn't realize the cite articles are available on Commons too; I'll change the code to generate refs using the templates instead.
Ucucha (talk) 19:25, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded a new version that:
  • Uses shapes for different kinds of records: filled circles for captured specimens; open circles for the Swedish echolocation-only records; crosses for the cave samples.
  • Uses colors from the accessible palette.
  • Uses cite templates, though it was a little annoying that Commons's version doesn't support enwp's "last1=" parameter.
  • Adds a few more records, including from Austria and Turkey.
I found more records from Germany and Austria but haven't added them yet because the sources don't give coordinates. Ucucha (talk) 05:51, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
😍
Thank you so much!
Yes, it's such a pain that first1 doesn't work here. People have been asking for it for years:
One solution is to use {{Citation}} instead as it supports first1 to first5. That's why I proposed to Enable ProveIt or Citoid on Commons: would help to automatically generate citations in the {{Citation}} format. A455bcd9 (talk) 08:08, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File_talk:Myotis_alcathoe_range.svg&oldid=718130887"