File talk:World map of opinions on Xinjiang camps.svg

Thoughts

Support, opposition or non opinion toward the camps should be demonstrated before a country is so colored on the map. It was said that, “The map is there for visual purposes. If you find an error, go to Commons and edit the map.” [1] I have requested updates here and on other similar maps several times and my opinions have been sustained on many occassions, for instance with the position of the government of the Gambia. But some of these questions are subtle, and the map uses a ram rod of threee categories that is artificial. Many claims about non-opinion are of unknown factual validity. It is unmistakably clear that the map is part of a general program of international Chinese influence, and not about the facts involved on a case by case basis for each country. Putting a country in light grey implies they have no known opinion or policy. But did anyone check? In some versions of the map, Taiwan is shown opposing the camps. If you want to do a map of signatories of the 2019 documents, that's different than what this is, and much more appropriatr. Bahrain and Qatar seem to have withdrawn support, yet one is in grey and one green. In a 2019 map, they would be colored green, and it would be stated they later pulled back in some kind of footnote situation. What's the threshold for known support, opposition or non-opinion? Is there a category for countries confirmed or checked unknown positions? What about vocally neutral? I can't allow unsourced or poorly sourced claims about government positions to persist on Wikipedia merely because its an illustrative map that could be helpful if it were fully accurate. Is Taiwan really Non-opinion or unknown opinion? Is Bahrain really pro camps? We should be very careful with a map like this, not shove it down the readers throats. It is a propaganda map if it is not clearly sourced or specifically justified in the case of every country, which is proven by the demand for illustration without deeper concern for factual validity. These positions may reflect 2019 opinions that almost certainly are not the same today. That's my position in a nutshell. Geographyinitiative (talk) 08:51, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

I am raising numerous apparently legitimate questions that lead to others making all kinds of changes to the map, almost in a willy nilly kind of fashion— as if the actual facts of support, opposition, etc aren't truly important and this map is actually about propaganda value. The fact that I can change this map with a moment's simple reflection is deeply concerning given I am a layman and not an actual expert in this subject matter. Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:11, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

The core issue is that we are not allowed to know facts related to East Turkestan/Xinjiang. I myself have upgraded like a hundred near stubs on Xinjiang minor geography topics. In 2020, Freedom House rated China negative one out of 100 in political rights. We need to be careful about the facts and not slipshod like we are being, because there is very little established knowledge about the region. Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:23, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative: I really really don't want to sound rude saying this, but... I honestly can't be bothered. See, I've had a lot of talk page banter ever since uploading this map, and I really want to spend my time on WP on other things than again and again changing a single colour and reuploading it all. So with the wiki being what it is, I would much rather see the user(s) finding the errors to fix them. I use Illustrator to edit SVG, but I'm sure there's freeware somewhere for others. So, with my genuine good faith, may I ask you and other users to fix the map yourselves whenever politics or consensus changes? Thank you, hope my point comes across without me sounding lazy. Gaioa (talk) 00:04, 25 August 2020 (UTC)