Talk:Malta/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Which map should we use in main infobox?

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

There is no consensus on what map to use. But the arguments did focus more on maps 1 and 2 for inclusion and those arguments were evenly split. AlbinoFerret 18:26, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

---

Early comment: 1 to 4 choices

Number 1

Number 2

Number 3

Number 4

Number 5

File:Malta-mainmap.png

Discuss below. We can also opt for "no map" or some other solution. 05:17, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

---

Number 2 is preferable, as it puts Malta in a geographical and cultural context. Number 1 is too eurocentric. -- haminoon (talk) 07:07, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Update: Number 3 is okay too. I think people should make it clearer when they update RFCs - the post above has the incorrect time on it. -- haminoon (talk) 23:09, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Number 1, map number 2 and 3 does not meet any requirement and breaks the standards and break the rules of Wikipedia.

1. "Number 1" (current map) is standard map of Europe, all EU/European countries use map number 1.
2. Number 2, number 3 is too large map.
3. Number 2, number 3 is poor quality, also as png not svg, second map is unnecessary and also what a dots on the map? chickenpox or acne?
4. There is no EU labeling in map number 2. Area of EU should be merked as green.
5. Number 2, number 3 is manipulation - this map not show United Kingdom but Malta has close connected with United Kingdom. From 1800 to 1964/1974 Malta is part of United Kingdom, English is official language in Malta and Malta is member of British Commonwealth of Nations. Malta is not member of Arab League. There are no Arab monuments in Malta. For most of its history Malta was not involved with the Arabs. Spain has more ties with Africa than Malta.
6. If number 2, number 3 will be improved, we can consider inserting this new map to a section of geography or article "geography of Malta" but never to main infobox of European country.
7. Number 2, number 3 is no logical, nonsense - map of Malta show only Southern Europe and Africa, without rest of Europe despite the fact that Malta is European (not African) state?
8. Number 2, number 3 breaking WP:Verifiability - sources show Malta as European state (not African state and not European-African)
9. Number 2 breaking WP:NPOV - author of new map try show Malta as Euro-African country. And also, see Ad.5
10. Number 2, number 3 breaking WP:OR - author of new map writes about historical relationship with Africa but this problem perfectly explains problem of Australia: in Australia official language is English and Australia has a English history and Australians are descendants of Englishmen, currently British Elizabeth II is head of state of Australia - but, despite the much greater connected UK and Australia than Malta and Africa, on map of Australia no exist United Kindom. Analyses (including concerning relations with other countries) are prohibited in Wikipedia. No original research! Malta - officially and generally and colloquially - is European country and lies in 100% in Europe, according to all sources. Subtropical-man talk
    (en-2) 09:02, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't see why its too big - it looks like a good size to me. Saying the second map implies membership of the Arab league is a pretty extreme and absurd argument, likewise the comparision with the settler-colony of Australia (actually only a third of Australians report English ancestry). I agree with you that a former colonising and non-neighbouring country doesn't need to be in the map, which also means I disagree you with you when you make the opposite argument in the same post. It definitely doesn't break any of the policies you mention. Yes Spain has many ties with North Africa, but it also lies in the continent of Europe and its first language is Latin derived instead of semitic. -- haminoon (talk) 09:33, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Haminoon, language use in country is too enough to change the maps of the world for show Malta as Arab country. Besides, it is nonsense - in Malta also English is official language and map number 2 remove United Kingdom from map. It is called hypocrisy. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 09:39, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

The second map doesn't show Malta as an Arab country - it just shows where it is in the world. You might like to have a look at all the English speaking former British colonies which don't have the UK in their infobox maps; and perhaps charge them with "hypocrisy" too. -- haminoon (talk) 09:51, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

You did not understand. You argue that in Malta is a Semitic language and that in the map should be Africa but new map remove United Kingdom although English language is official language in Malta. It's hypocrisy. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 09:55, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm making a distinction between an indigenous language and a coloniser's language. -- haminoon (talk) 10:02, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Malta's membership change just because of the language is pure absurdity. Currently Malta has only one thing related to Arab and Africa - a'la semitic language but even the affiliation of the language is not obvious, see read: "Maltese is a Semitic language descended from Siculo-Arabic.[16] Because of the Sicilian influence on Siculo-Arabic, Maltese has many language contact features and is most commonly described as a language with a large number of loanwords.[17]" "The Maltese language has historically been classified in various ways, with some claiming that the ancient Punic language was the base of the language, instead of Siculo-Arabic,[12][18][19] while others believed the language to be Berber,[12] and under Italy, it was considered a dialect of Italian.[20]" Currently in Malta are architectural sites, English as official language and extra wide British culture. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 10:29, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

• 11. in addition - in new map there is too much shown of Africa, 60% Africa, 35% Europe, 5% Asia. Completely wrong proportions. Subtropical-man talk
  (en-2) 09:46, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
• I have nothing against to improve the map number 1, cut a little peak, add 15-20% more Africa (the current map has approximately 10% of Africa) - see example but map number 2 is totally not acceptable. Subtropical-man talk
  (en-2) 10:01, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

That would be an improvement on the status quo. -- haminoon (talk) 10:14, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

If user @Dennis Bratland: or other correct map number 1 in this way ([1]) - I will support change. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 10:33, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

I wrote to the author of original maps [2], maybe can improve the map to compromise and reach consensus :) Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 10:43, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Number 3 is still preferable, or Number 2. I'm sorry, but I can't comprehend Subtropical-man's objections. It's obvious that a locator map of any place should put that place in the center of the map and show the nearby areas. This is not that complicated. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 14:31, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Locator and inset map of Malta.png is a new version with some of the proportions adjusted. It doesn't change the fundamental question here, which is whether to keep a Eurocentric map or not. After that, there is always time to make improvements but right now we can decide to have a neutral map. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 15:21, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Simply, your map - File:Locator and inset map of Malta.png - number 2 is too large Africa. Malta lies in Europe and you show on map of Malta: Sudan, Niger, Chad, Mali. You should apply reasonable proportions, for example 66% of Europe, 33% of Africa. Enough that map show Morocco, Algeria, Libya, Tunisia, Egypt. It's enough. Apart from a short period in a very long history of Malta and the language (70% of language) that Malta does not have anything to do with Africa. Your proporcion 50:50 with Africa is totally not acceptable for any European country. Also #2, your map there is no marked boundaries of the EU. Also #3, your map not show whole Europe. Also #4 - your bottom map is a nightmare, streets look hopelessly and dots look like acne or chicken pox. Sorry. You want more Africa on map - ok, but Malta is European country and Europe must to be whole. My proposition is good [3], new map marked boundaries of the EU, Europe is whole, to meet the principles and standards of Wikipedia (like thirty other articles), and also had to more Africa - ideal compromise. User Haminoon and me agreed to this compromise. You can continue to fight but I will never give up. I will fight with your current map even years. Your choice. The compromise is stepping down both sides, not olny one. You accept a compromise or not. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 15:49, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

These made-up percentages have no basis in reality. Why should we organize maps based on arbitrary proportions one single editor made up in his head? Nobody understands what your problem with Africa is. The consensus so far is to put the subject in the center. I don't expect that will change. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:31, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Current map is protect by the status quo. In Wikipedia, articles about European countries has the same map - map of whole Europe. You are trying to disrupt standard and trying to push map with only half of Europe and... Africa (50:50). But Malta is European country and should be on map of Europe. I tried to create a compromise - different proportions than 50:50. But no, for you is not enough. You do not want a compromise, you want to push only own map? Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 17:01, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

You have been told more than once that I would be happy with any other map that put the subject in the center. It doesn't have to be one that I made. Please do not make false accusations. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 17:05, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

You know what this is compromise? the two sides have something to give to hammer out agreement. I have nothing against to improve the map number 1, cut a little peak, add 20% more Africa (total about 33% of Africa in map). Malta would be almost in the center of the map but keeping the entire map of Europe because Malta lies in Europe. Besides, my proposition does not break standard among European coutries. Please agree to compromise. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 17:15, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

The whole problem here is treating Africa as being less significant than Europe. I would agree to all sorts of things but the one thing I won't agree to is diminishing Africa without a clear and compelling reason, and a reason which any reader will understand at a glance. The Wikipedia pillar of neutrality is far more important than any precedents about consistency of maps. And we can put up a neutral map today and at some future time make a neutral map that is also consistent in design with others. But neutrality trumps design. I can't speak for the three other editors who also think Malta belongs in the center of the locator map. I don't think their opinions are heavily influenced by what I think. Remember, the whole point of a locator map is to answer the question, "Where in the world is Malta?" --Dennis Bratland (talk) 17:23, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Malta lies in Europe according to all sources. This is not neutrality for you? You ask: "Where in the world is Malta?" answer: Malta lies in Europe, simply. This is the crux of the matter. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 17:28, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Dennis Bratland, any other questions? Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 19:25, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

The proposed image isn't appropriate. Other countries' articles only have a map to locate the country, not a map of the country itself. This is because it's better to include a larger map in the body of the article, to show the country with much more detail. I don't think anybody can read the labels on the map you propose at 250px. Instead, using an insert to zoom in without labels (like the existing map) is definitely more appropriate. Aside from that, centring the map on Malta goes against a widespread convention for EU countries (and most other European countries). If Malta wasn't an EU country, like Belarus, then I would probably be impartial to centring the map on the country; but since it is part of the EU, I think it should be shown within the union. Rob984 (talk) 18:34, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

You can call it a "widespread convention" but centering the map of all these countries in Europe looks an awful lot like ugly old Eurocentrism with a fancy name. Why isn't this convention documented anywhere? Has it ever been discussed? Why center on the EU? Why not NATO? Or the UN? And how is the average person looking at Malta or Greece supposed to know this is the reason that the subject is stuffed off in the corner of the map? To me it looks like someone made a map template they they liked and then cranked out a whole lot of cookie-cutter maps without much thought or discussion. The effect is to create a strong visual slight against the regions bordering Europe, and the motive is not clear to people who just want to see a locator map of where the subject of the article is in the world. It makes Africa and Asia look unimportant and irrelevant. Your other objections are all fixable, but they are less urgent than neutrality, which we can have right now by changing to a map with Malta in the center. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 17:11, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Malta is European country, map of Europe is natural and logical solution and there is no connection with Eurocentrism. You wrote: "Why center on the EU? Why not NATO? Or the UN?" - in the USA they do not teach in schools about the European Union? The European Union operates on the principle of confederation, European Union has own parliament, constitution, borders, citizens, currency etc, de facto not much different from USA. Whereas UN or NATO is just organisation. European Union and UN/NATO are two different things. You wrote "Africa and Asia look unimportant and irrelevant" - Malta lies in Europe, look of Africa or Asia is not relevant. In addition, I proposed compromise - standard map of Europe/UE with more Africa (~35% of the size of map): [4]. I and user Haminoon we could support compromise. You prefer own map which cuts off half of Europe - which Malta is a part. What matters is cooperation and compromise. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 18:05, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

The EU is not a country. The EU parliament is inferior to the parliaments of member states. The EU operates by negotiation between member states' actual governments, which have the final say, not the EU parliament. The comparison with the US is false. The US Federal Government has the final say over state governments, and the federal courts overrule state courts. If we're going to pretend the EU is a country, we might as well pretend NAFTA is a country.

The core problem is that a few Wikipedia editors have decided that EU membership is the defining characteristic of these countries, and they are using the way they're presented in the infobox in order to push that opinion. The infobox should stick to basic facts about where a country is and what it's borders are, and not try to characterize what the EU is or isn't. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 15:40, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

You wrote: "The EU is not a country. (...) If we're going to pretend the EU is a country" - nobody here does not claim that EU is the country. The sentence is a variety of personal attack. The EU is not a country, this is not typical entity.

You wrote: "The EU parliament is inferior to the parliaments of member states" - no, you wrong. Law and ordinances by EU parliament are more important and are higher than parliaments of the EU states. If the EU introduces a new law/ordinances etc, states of the EU must adapt it. No state can avoid from the introduction of new laws of EU.

You wrote: "The EU operates by negotiation between member states' actual governments, which have the final say, not the EU parliament" - no, in EU parliament there are politicians who elected in general elections by citizens of the European Union.

You wrote: "(...) that EU membership is the defining characteristic of these countries" - yes, EU membership is the defining characteristic of these countries. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 17:01, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

It's understandable that you would want a map that makes the EU look like a country if this is how you think it works. Anyone can look this up for themselves. Defying EU rules brings only the loss of privileges, the same as a signatory breaking NAFTA rules. Whereas we fought the Civil War when U.S. States tried that. Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:39, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

• No, I support map of Malta with marker of the EU because Malta is one of states of the EU and - as user Barjimoa wrote, Maltese people are citizen of the European Union. Simply.
• Civil War in U.S. is history. Today, the European Union limited sovereignty of countries within the EU, states of EU - de facto - has just partial sovereignty because EU law acts and ordinances by EU parliament are more important and are higher than parliaments of the EU states. If the EU introduces a new law/ordinances etc, states of the EU must adapt it. However, states has possibility of leaving the EU (without war). Interestingly, citizens of this states are voted to join to EU in referendum. It is the will of residents, now - citizens of the European Union. Subtropical-man talk
  (en-2) 19:50, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Comparing the EU to NAFTA makes no sense. The former is a political union, the latter is not even an economic union. Cobblet (talk) 20:40, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

The similarity is that the EU, like NAFTA or the WTO, is in the end a treaty between sovereign countries. As long as they like the deal, they can stay in. If they decide they can't accept the rules any more, the sovereign government has the option to back out of the deal. Currently our map gives the reader tons of useless information about how far Malta is from Estonia or Denmark but the map is cut off in such a way to only hint at Malta's physical relationship with nearby neighbors like Tunisia or Libya or Algeria. If you read Malta, you'll see that Malta's actual neighbors, in north Africa and southern Europe, are mentioned prominently because they naturally figure in the history and development of Malta, while these far away countries in the north of Europe hardly figure in at all. I'm not saying the EU isn't important, or unique. I'm saying it's not the most important, defining fact about a country with a history going back a couple thousand years. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:00, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

"Hint"? The map shows Tunisia in almost its entirety, and also shows the physical area where 90% of Libya and Algeria's population live. That Malta is a European country is of course one of the "most important, defining" facts about it (notice how the lead sentence mentions Europe but not Africa), so it's only natural that the entirety of Europe be shown on the map. I have no objections if you want to show the entirety of Africa as well (that was my other suggestion below), but you are underestimating the importance of Europe to Malta. Would you care to explain how Malta has a closer link to Niger than the United Kingdom, which seems to be the implication of your preferred map #3? Cobblet (talk) 21:32, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

The third map shows sort of half of Nigher and sort of Half of the UK. Looks about the same to me, and doesn't draw particular attention to either the UK or Niger. Closer link in what way? The only point of zooming out in the 3rd map was to satisfy those who wanted to see more of Europe. If we just want to locate Malt in the Mediterranean, then #2 does that. The point remains that the subject belongs in the center, that's all. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:13, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Less than half of the UK and more than half of Niger, in fact. Quite absurd when contact with Niger and other parts of sub-Saharan Africa does not figure prominently in Malta's history, but British control over it does. You say that showing the distance between Malta and Denmark is "useless", ignoring the existence of deep economic and political ties between those countries, the significance of which others here have repeatedly tried to explain to you (which you don't accept, but that's not their problem). My point is that showing the distance between Malta and Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad, Sudan or Eritrea is even more useless, and that is the only benefit of #3. Malta is unequivocally a European country and to not show the entirety of Europe on a location map for Malta is to unreasonably diminish the significance of that fact. If you insist that Malta must be located in the centre of the map, draw one along the lines of my second suggestion below. Cobblet (talk) 23:51, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, no. Starting a contest over the precise percentage of countries cut off by the edge of the map is not relevant or helpful. It is trivially easy to regenerate a map that's zoomed in or zoomed out slightly. I think its obvious that to give the general reader a good idea of where Malta is located, they need to see Malta's surrounding region, not just the northern half of Malta's neighbors. Simple. I really don't know how we expect someone not privy to Wikipedia's battles of the status of the EU to understand why these maps look this way. Without insider information, the Eurocentric map looks like a very weird locator map. It's not self-explanatory; it raises more questions than it answers. Readers need a straightforward map that tells them where Malta is without any distractions. If you want to zoom in a bit and show less of Niger, fine. Who cares? It's not what this is really about. This is about stuffing a small country down in the very bottom of the map on an article that is supposedly about that small country. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:07, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Eurocentricism is entirely appropriate from the perspective of a European country. Knowing that the EU is politically significant to its member states is not "insider information", unless you think Alaska or Hawaii being part of the United States is also "insider information" to a foreigner who would otherwise be mystified as to why those maps aren't centered on the states. I've already explained that any part of North Africa that could be considered relevant is already clearly shown on the map. I suggest you expand your crusade to Talk:Cyprus because that is an even more egregious map by your standards. Maybe you'll find more sympathetic ears over there. Cobblet (talk) 00:54, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

My "crusade"? Would you like it if I called what you're doing a "crusade"? Or would you just call it editing Wikipedia? You're editing, I'm editing, nobody here is a "crusader". I agree that this current map is going to be interpreted by readers exactly the same way they would Alaska or Hawaii; they will deduce that Alaska and Hawaii are states of a country, and this map makes the EU look like a country, and Malta not a sovereign nation. But the EU is not a country. You're also right that Cyprus has the same problem. This RfC has been muddled by adding to many extra choices and by canvassing and will probably be closed as no consensus. So probably a broader discussion will be needed to fix this widespread problem of maps that don't put the subject where it belongs, in the middle. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:05, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

"Crusade" was uncivil language, of which there has been way too much of in this discussion. The comparison with Hawai'i is interesting as we have separate articles for the (American) state and the (Polynesian) archipelago, while the Malta article is about both the political entity and the archipelago. The state is clearly more closely aligned with Europe than Africa, but the archipelago is about equidistant between the two continents. The state has only existed for a few decades so most of the article is about the archipelago. Shouldn't the map reflect the article? -- haminoon (talk) 02:19, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

The infobox says "Republic of Malta" at the top, not "Maltese Archipelago". Besides, the islands have been almost continuously occupied by European powers since Roman times (the time when it wasn't largely coincided with it being "practically uninhabited"). It's not merely the current state that has had closer ties to Europe. In my initial comments below I had already acknowledged that it's reasonable to make a map that has Malta in the centre. If you steadfastly refuse to respect the point of view that says it's reasonable to show the entirety of the EU in a locator map of Malta (to the point of calling this a "problem"), then the label of incivility applies equally to you. As I have pointed out, the two viewpoints are not mutually exclusive. Cobblet (talk) 02:54, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

• Dennis, the only common point of the EU and NAFTA/WTO/UN etc is that "between sovereign countries" (in the case of EU - only on paper, de facto - not). In rest of points - EU and NAFTA/WTO/UN etc - there are two completely different things. I'm not going to explain and explain and explain it to the rest of my life. Please read Wikipedia:Competence is required.
• Map number 1 show "Malta's actual neighbors" - some African countries: whole Tunisia, part of Libia, Algeria, Marocco, Egipt. Map number 5 offers additional zoom. So.
• Malta lies in Europe, Malta is one of states of the EU and also - as user Barjimoa wrote, Maltese people are citizen of the European Union. This is not negotiable. These are facts. The facts are not discussed. Europe must be visible and EU must be marked. It's already been explained. We can discuss about bottom map, to show more details / to show the sea and more Africa. Subtropical-man talk
  (en-2) 21:45, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Extended content

Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Rob984 (talk • contribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. (diff) This is a blatant case of WP:CANVASSING. Subtropical-man requested Rob984 to come and give his opinion here. It's one thing to advertise a discussion on related project talk pages, but recruiting editors you know are sympathetic to your views not acceptable. The !vote by Rob984 should be ignored. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:55, 2 May 2015 (UTC) Wrong. What? "Subtropical-man requested Rob984 to come and give his opinion" - this is lie. See link. This is a private ask to user Rob for an opinion [5] on only private talk page, I have not request to opinion or vote in talk page of Malta, even not give a link to this discussion! I just wanted his private statements in his or my talk page. Subtropical-man talk (en-2) 21:23, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Number 3 is too deep. We don't need to show much more than the top part of Africa and the bottom part of Europe. I still prefer Number 2. Malta is in the Mediterranean, and we should simply show the borders of that big sea, with maybe a bit more beyond. As for this nation being part of the EU, well, it is also a part of the United Nations and many other international organizations. Malta is still an independent country, last I looked. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 21:48, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

• Number 2 or 3 would be good, although either could be improved by shading fellow EC/EU members &c. Number 1 seems to be more about showing the extent of a transnational organisation, of which Malta just happens to be a small member on the southern fringe. This "status quo" is not the best option. bobrayner (talk) 19:12, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I hope that the closer will bear in mind Subtropical-man's string of strawmen and factual errors when closing this discussion. No, it's not an NPOV violation to have a map which shows part of Africa - because Malta is off the north coast of Africa. No, there is no "standard" that mandates a Europe-only map. No, WP:Verifiability isn't broken either - Dennis Bratland's improved maps do not make any false or misleading statements about Malta. bobrayner (talk) 19:22, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

    bobrayner, you wrote: "No, it's not an NPOV violation to have a map which shows part of Africa - because Malta is off the north coast of Africa" - standard map (number 1) shows part of Africa, map by Dennis Bratland shows Africa on half of map, again: half of map of European country is Africa and cut half of Europe!!! It does not fit in the head. Also, If you say so - we must change map of Florida from standard map to map of south half of US and Mexico/The Caribbean because Florida must be centered in map? Yes? Subtropical-man talk
    (en-2) 20:55, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Malta is an independent country. Florida is not. Nevertheless, st-man makes a valid point, Florida being closer to the Caribbean than it is to Alaska, that's for sure! Obviously there should be a map at Florida to show where it is in relation to the rest of the world. We wouldn't know from looking at the two maps on Florida's WP page that it is only 90 miles from Cuba! BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 21:14, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, that at least one agreeing. PS. Question to the general public - users in this vote: someone comes from Malta? or someone comes from EU? Because I see here vote from Americans and one user from New Zealand :/ Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 21:21, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Do you feel that somebody from Malta or the EU should have more weight in this discussion? bobrayner (talk) 21:27, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

more? maybe not, maybe yes but - without a doubt - few users from Malta and EU should speak in this discussion. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 21:30, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Number 2 The issue is not Malta being European or African, but Malta being Mediterranean. Therefore a map of Malta should be focused on the Mediterranean. Bosstopher (talk) 21:39, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

As an aside, I added a map that shows Cuba's and the Bahamas' relation to Florida at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Florida&type=revision&diff=660659234&oldid=659693859. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 21:56, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

In section of Geography. I also support map by Dennis but only in section of Geography, never in infobox! Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 22:24, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

---

I just added Number 4, which is now the one I prefer because it shows Malta not only in relation to the other two continents but to the world as a whole. Scroll up to see it. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 22:03, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

It sounds like there's majority support for the upper half from 2 and the lower half from 3, which is easily possible. Probably a better solution is to follow the example of a FA like Cameroon where the locator and the country map are two separate images, decoupling any issues with one or the other. For the present time, I think most editors are saying they support a map with the country in the center. Assuming there is overwhelming consensus behind centering the subject in the locator, somehow, then we can put off further improvements, or choosing which centered map is best, once this RfC is resolved. Which is to say, I support Number 4 too, insofar as it addresses the primary issue of neutrality. Whether we add a second map, as in Cameroon, is a separate question. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:25, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Dennis, if you propose use two maps: number 1 (Europe/EU) and below number 2 or 3 (zoom / Europe and Africa, but without the lower part op file) or number 4 (zoom / Europe and Africa) - I support it. Please see [6]. Dennis, do you agree? Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 13:13, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

or - I create new map - number 5 - [7]. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 13:24, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Comment: I like Number 1 the best, as Malta is an EU member. That being said, why can't we take that map and pan the view down by 20% or so? That would have the benefit of both centering Malta and making Africa more prominent. The panned view could also be used for Cyprus, or even Greece. Faceless Enemy (talk) 02:25, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Number 1, Malta is part of the EU periodBarjimoa (talk) 14:06, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

What does this mean? Malta is in the Mediterranean period. Malta is in the UN period. Malta is in the Commonwealth period. What does this have to do with the map? -- haminoon (talk) 02:55, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I do not know which means word of "period" in this sentence, maybe user wants to say that Malta is part of the EU. If so, it is understandable.

Please do not compare the EU to the organizations like UN, NATO or Commonwealth because there are two different things. The European Union operates on the principle of confederation, even in the constitution of EU was to be a record of "federation" but United Kingdom was oppose. European Union has own parliament, constitution, law, borders, citizens, currency etc, de facto not much different from USA. Whereas UN or NATO is just organisation. EU residents are oficially citizens of the European Union, and it is unacceptable to the remove of EU mark from the map of one of states of EU. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 13:58, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Right. The EU is a political union which lies between a confederation and a federation. The EU has legal personality, Citizens of malta are European citizens, etc...Barjimoa (talk) 17:23, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Exactly, meaning of your sentence of "Citizens of malta are European citizens" is great, the sentence a very simple way to explains that removal of mark of the EU from the map of one states of the European Union is unacceptable. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 17:35, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Later comment: 5 choices

• Favor No. 5 because it is a good example of WP:Consensus. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 18:25, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Number 5 is pointlessly redundant. One map is there to show where Malta is, a second, nearly identical map is there only to belabor the point that Malta is a member of the EU. Consensus is nice and all but I don't see how this fifth map has helped in any way. It's a bit late to say so, but sadly I don't see how a the closing admin is going to be able to come to any kind of decision, because after a couple editors weighed in selecting one of the two initial options, a third, fourth, and fifth choice was added. It's a mess now, as if the canvassing hadn't already screwed the pooch. The initial question should have been, should the subject be centered or off centered. If we can agree to have it centered, then later decide about further improvements. Anyway, no, the fifth one looks ludicrous, and there is no consensus for such a solution. A locator plus a local map makes sense. Two large scale locators? Silly. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:41, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Dennis, the discussion is still ongoing and it will take maybe a few weeks if there will be new proposals and new posts. The main thing is to choose a good map to infobox, not your point of view. Number 5 is double map and Malta is in the center of map, according to the recommendations of few users. We can consider instead lower-map (centered) insert a more detailed map of location of Malta (Europe/Arfica), for example with names of countries. But I see that you're the only one not willing to compromise. Earlier you wrote that "I'm not insisting on using only my map at File:Map of Malta with locator.png. I'd welcome any locator map that puts Malta in the center" [8] - ok, number 5 is locator map that also puts Malta in the center. By the way, I know, the EU is a competitor of your country: USA but if you came here to fight with the European Union (I suspected this before), I report it to administrators according to the WP:BATTLEGROUND and few other rules. The rules say that Wikipedia is not a place to hold grudges, conflicts, carry on ideological battles, nurture prejudice, hatred, or political views etc. I just inform. PS. You wrote "silly", this is personal attack. Let us continue a substantive discussion. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 18:56, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

• eventually number 5 (this is very good compromise) but I the more I prefer a standard map - number 1. Subtropical-man talk
  (en-2) 19:00, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Let's refrain from personal attacks, lest we attack all the editors who live in any particular country or group of countries. I am assuming good faith of all the editors here. Sincerely, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 19:41, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Ok, maybe you're right. I obliterate these sentence. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 19:51, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

I see two conventions for infobox maps of countries bordering the Mediterranean:

1. Either they're centered on Europe or Africa (depending on which continent they belong to), even if the country is nowhere close to being in the centre of the map (the most extreme example being Cyprus);
2. Or in the case of Turkey, Lebanon, Israel and Syria, the map is centered on the country, but is zoomed out to such an extent that Europe, Africa and the Asian mainland are all visible (and has an inset in the case of Lebanon and Israel).

So I humbly suggest we either adopt #1 (which emphasizes its membership in the EU – I don't see that as "Eurocentricism", merely an accurate reflection of its status as a member of a supranational union) which is in the spirit of the first approach; or make a new map along the lines of the second approach (a map centered on Malta where the entirety of both Europe and Africa is visible; compare the maps of Iceland or Greenland, which show both Europe and North America). You could highlight the EU in the second map so that it's still clear Malta's part of the EU. Cobblet (talk) 09:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

As i said, Number 1. Barjimoa (talk) 17:23, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Number 1 -- Summoned by bot. I think that number 1 clearly shows where Malta is located, both on a larger scale and a smaller scale, and it also shows the shape/size of the country. It is clear to me, by looking at that map, the general region Malta is a part of. I don't think that any of the other maps are necessary, being that they are a little more intricate and detailed. Cheers and good luck. Comatmebro ^{~Come at me~} 00:50, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Add a new map

I added the map with Malta at the center near the top of the page in the paragraph that refers to the island's strategic importance. Can we accept that? Sincerely, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 07:36, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

This has the same redundancy problem as map #5. There are two almost identical maps right next to each other. Why? Because a few editors think membership in the EU is the defining fact about Malta. The first sentence of Malta is not "Malta is an EU country", unlike Oklahoma which says "Oklahoma is a state in the South Central United States" or West Bengal which says "West Bengalis a state in eastern India..." For a state, the defining fact is that it's part of a country; that belongs in the lead. For EU members, this is not the case. The EU only comes up in the first paragraph because Malta happens to be the smallest EU country. France and Germany make no mention of the EU at all in the lead. How can EU membership be a defining fact when few articles treat it that way?

This need to overemphasize the EU has us bending over backwards to put a map of the EU in the infobox, to the point of sandwiching text between the infobox and the image, which WP:IMGLOC says is not desirable. At the very least, move the map from the left back into the infobox using |image_map2 = |alt_map2 = |map_caption2 = . That gives us essentially Map 5, but it's less ugly than the current state. I don't think this is resolved, and I don't think this RfC should have been closed this way. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:33, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

FWIW, I created a draft Draft:Malta with my preferred solution, using two separate maps as Camaroon does, and a medium zoom level, down to the border of Egypt for the locator. The EU map is down at Draft:Malta#Independence and Republic.

Somebody earlier complained that not all the text in the images can be read at 250px. There are numerous Featured Articles (Ambohimanga#Fortifications, Antarctica#Geography, Australia#History, etc.) where you can't read all the text at thumb scale; you have to click on the image to read every word on the map, depending of course on your display. That's the point of the click to zoom feature, and it varies anyway with the your pixel size, display resolution, eyesight, and so on.

Another question: why does State of Malta use the same Eurocentric map? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:50, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Standard map (number 1) is better to infobox, why - it was already explained 10 times. Your map eventually can add to the section of geography. Nothing more. But, also in this are doubts because the map is of poor quality and has a strange dots. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 20:31, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, you have posted this explanation your opinion 10 times. Now you said the exact same thing for the 11th time. Why? I don't know what strange dots you mean but I'm sure it's easily fixed. Do you know your preferred image has a circle around Sicily? Is there any way to fix that? Can you, or anybody, fix it? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:54, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

The current version (map number 1) has existed for years and this is status quo. If you want new changes (hide map of the EU and show half of Africa) you must show very important arguments. But you not show any important arguments. Even despite the fact that Malta lies in Europe, Malta is one of states of the European Union and also Maltese people are citizen of the European Union - thereupon - hiding the EU is unacceptable, your only argument - centering the map was overthrown because map of the sea and with more Africa can be inserted into geography section - without breaking the status quo and standards within all the EU states. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 21:06, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Overthrown? All I see here is no consensus. Do you think your argument has been "overthrown" merely because some editors disagree with you? I don't understand why you have repeatedly asserted that this discussion is over and has been resolved. You keep declaring victory prematurely. That is wishful thinking. I understand your opinion has not changed but well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man. Let me assure you that it isn't necessary to repeatedly remind everyone that your opinion hasn't changed. We know. It isn't necessary to re-state yourself like this. What you call "breaking the status quo" everyone else calls "editing Wikipedia". Because consensus can change.

Can you fix the circle around Sicily? It looks like Sicily is part of Malta. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:21, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

You wrote: "you have repeatedly asserted that this discussion is over" - repeatedly? Please provide links and quotes, accurately count! Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 21:27, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Malta lies in Europe - this is my opinion? Malta is one of states of the European Union - this is my opinion? Maltese people are citizen of the European Union - this is my opinion? No, these are facts. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 21:19, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Those are some facts, but there are other facts, and there are different conclusions one can come to based on various facts. Malta is in the Mediterranean. Malta has a culture with equal parts from Europe and Africa and Arabia. I conclude that we need a non-Eurocentric map. At the very least, we should move the circle so it doesn't go around Sicily, but can we? See, these SVG maps are nice and pretty, but they are very difficult to maintain. Nobody knows how to make even small corrections, yet a few editors cling to them in spite of their flaws. What if we could re-edit the SVG map so everything was the same but Malta was in the middle? That might be a nice compromise but we can't because these old maps are so difficult to work with.

Please: you don't need to repeat anything you have already said. We know. We got it the first time. If you have something new to say, please do. Can you fix that circle around Sicily? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:31, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

You wrote: "Malta has a culture with equal parts from Europe and Africa and Arabia" - equal parts? Europe and Africa and Arabia? WOW! Long ago, I not read anything like it. In the first, second and third order, please read: Wikipedia:Competence is required. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 21:42, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Map of Afro-Asiatic language family

Maltese is a Siculo-Arabic language, and the only Semitic national language in the EU. Malta has Muslim period lasting a couple hundred years, several hundred under Carthaginian rule, Phoenician connections going back millennia. These are deep roots outside Europe, along with the time as a British colony, or Napoleonic possession. Have you actually read "Wikipedia:Competence is required"? Do you know why there is a warning at the top of the page that says, "Be very cautious when referencing this page, as it can be very insulting to other editors"? The essay does not exist as a way to bludgeon other editors whenever you have a difference of opinion. Please do not call others incompetent merely because you have a different opinion.

I think the difficulty in correcting a simple error in the SVG map is a compelling reason to let go of it and move forward with something new. Nobody knows how to even move a little circle so it doesn't enclose both Malta and Sicily. If we could let go of this old map and move on we would be free to make small improvement like that. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:54, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Map of English language in world

Malta's history dates back more than 7000 years (constructing temples), cavemen were even earlier but Phoenician/Cartage period is just about 300 years, Arab period is just 178 years. The only African/Arabian thing in current Malta is language (with large Italian influences), in curent Malta there is no African/Arabian culture, architecture, customs and other. For current Malta, African/Arabian period is just episode. So, your text of "Malta has a culture with equal parts from Europe and Africa and Arabia" asks for a show link of WP:CIR.

You wrote: "If we could let go of this old map and move on we would be free to make small improvement like that" - old map? what map? Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 22:29, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

History of Malta says 220 years. Or see Islam in Malta, which extends Muslim inflence well beyond the Muslim period, into the Middle Ages and beyond. Because obviously Malta would have been influenced by it's neighbors in Africa.

It's exactly this kind of absurd nitpicking over who had more inflence that can be mooted by simply putting the subject of the article in the center of the map. Do you really think we could ever reach a consensus for the precise degree of influence of each country's neighbors? It can't be done, and it doesn't need to be done for the infobox map. We just want to know, where is Malta? What does Malta look like?

The old map is File:EU-Malta.svg, map #1. The map we are stuck with merely because it looks similar to other maps. Can you fix the green circle that encloses both Sicily and Malta? The circle should go around Malta but not Sicily. Can anyone fix it? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:38, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Islam in Malta - 0,1% of population, the lowest rate in Europe.

You wrote: "where is Malta?" - this simple, Malta lies in Europe. Only in Europe, nothing more.

Many users edits SVG files (not me) - you should ask the right user. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 22:41, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Exactly! Wikipedia is supposed to be the encyclopedia anyone can edit. But to make a small change to a map, you have to be one of a select number of editors, or you have to go begging to find someone to do it for you. Insisting that our maps have to look the same and be the same format has created an artificial barrier to editing. It has made it too difficult to make very simple, small corrections like moving the circle around Malta. Regardless of whether the map is centered on Malta or Eurocentric, we need to stop pretending we're required to follow this "standard" map style and format. It prevents making improvement to articles. Especially since this "standard" is not documented anywhere, has never been discussed, has never achieved consensus, and is clearly not neutral. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:46, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

if you want to change the standard of maps in Wikipedia from SVG to png/jpg - good luck, I doubt that will be a consensus in this decade. You can edit the SVG file normally, but in another program - not to raster graphic (like Paint in MS Windows) but in program to vector graphics (like CorelDraw). Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 22:51, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Well, if you want to run out and buy a Corel Draw license to edit Wikipedia, please go ahead. I don't think $499.00 is a reasonable barrier for doing basic editing. Or $19.99 per month for Adobe Illustrator. In the mean time I've fixed the problem with a png file at a cost of $0. I didn't make any other changes since there is no consensus here, other than improving the outline of the closeup map of the islands from the vague blob that was there before. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:04, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

• There are many free programs for vector graphics, you do not have to pay anything.
• Your changes in map number 1 change the appearance of the map and colors. No, you changed the map to total another map (and displays a errors of size of Scandinavia). I reverted it. If you can not use program for vector graphics, you can someone ask to correct of "roundel" without changes in appearance of image and without change of file extension. Subtropical-man talk
  (en-2) 11:08, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

This proves my point. You won't accept any change, and you are preventing others from editing the article using arbitrary rules that you have made up in order to prevent any change. SVG format is not mandatory. There is no error in the size of Scandinavia; it's just a Mercator projection. You're the one insisting Scandinavia has to appear on a map of Malta; common sense would say we don't need to show Northern Europe at all. Ownership of articles is prohibited you know. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 14:49, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Mercator projection or not - Scandinavia is not natural and too big in your map. By the way, you should improve in existing map (only ring, nothing more), but you insert another map (with another colours, file extension, proportions) without discussion and consensus. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 16:33, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

So now you've made up another fake rule that Mercator projections are not allowed? And only SVG maps are allowed? Please stop edit warring. Please stop acting like you own this article. Please stop pretending that you get to make up your own Wikipedia rules. Please stop edit warring. Your behavior is disruptive. And while you're at it, can you learn to use the show preview button. Edit conflicts because you need to make 15 corrections after you save are annoying. Show preview. Read. Correct. Save page.

I inserted another map? Where? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:41, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

• First, please stop personal attacks.
• Second: I have never written that Mercator projections and another file extensions than SVG are not allowed. However, SVG maps are the result of consensus and is standard for years. If someone want change it, must to be consensus.
• The map of Europe based on Mercator projections is disproportionate, Scandinavia is not natural and too big in your map. This is a very serious argument.
• I'm not owner of the article but I have the right to undo unauthorized editions. Why unauthorized? You entered a completely new map to infobox without discussion and consensus (ostensibly change of ring).
• "I inserted another map? Where?" - here. This is completely new map (with Mercator projections, another colours, file extension, proportions etc). Please stop make changes to the maps without consensus!!! Subtropical-man talk
  (en-2) 17:21, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

• Have you actually tried to use any of the free SVG tools? They don't work. SVG-edit doesn't work. OpenOffice Draw is full of bugs that prevent uploading to Wikipedia. You have created arbitrary restrictions that prevent improving articles by anyone except a small group of map editors. Anyone should be allowed to upload a revised map in any reasonable format, PNG or GIF or even JPG if it is not too fuzzy, and then later, if some perfectionist wants to redo it in SVG with an isomorphic projection, great. But you cannot use that as a barrier to prevent making small improvements. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 17:34, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

• users uses many programs (including free), for example. These programs work. More programs is here and google.
• If you can not change only ring in SVG map without any other changes, you can ask someone who can. Simply.
• small improvements? you create completely new map with Mercator projections; with other colours, file extension, proportions etc and entered to article (ostensibly change of ring). Subtropical-man talk
  (en-2) 17:48, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

• I don't want to wait around for someone else to edit for me. I want to edit now. Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. This barrier you've erected violates the spirit of Wikipedia. Anyone should be able to edit. I'm well aware of these wonderful free programs for SVG files. Why don't you download one of them and try to move the green circle in File:EU-Malta.svg. If it's so easy, why don't you try it? An easy solution is to make a new, nearly identical map, in a png file. If somebody else wants to then later convert that to SVG for the sake of perfection, fine. But this artificial barrier to editing is not acceptable. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:23, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

• I understand it, but edit files is not edit of Wikipedia. You want to edit now? No problem, you can correct ring but without any other changes. You can not? I also can not edit, I can not edit other files, for example File:Malta_National_Anthem.ogg. And what? I want change SGV, OGG and other files? I must learn it. Subtropical-man talk
  (en-2) 18:45, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

More arbitrary rules you made up five minutes ago. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:19, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Malta Topographic Map

Thank you for clarifying it, Xwejnusgozo. It is confusing to see it on the map like that though. It is a very clear topographic map, which I like, but it would be great if the map could be modified or changed so that other people don't also think it is a mistake... Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barxia (talk • contribs) 01:11, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malta#/media/File:General_map_of_Malta.svg The topographic map on this page has "Rabat" listed twice on different islands. I am sure this is incorrect. Please check and change as necessary. As I understand it, Rabat is on the largest island to the south, Malta island, not on Gozo Island. Barxia (talk) 12:22, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

@Barxia: The "Rabat" on Gozo is the city of Victoria, which is also known as Rabat. Xwejnusgozo (talk) 12:40, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Malta. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101229050005/http://www.port.ac.uk:80/aboutus/newsandevents/news/archive2009/april2009/title,94480,en.html to http://www.port.ac.uk/aboutus/newsandevents/news/archive2009/april2009/title,94480,en.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071011051104/http://europa.eu:80/abc/history/2000_today/index_en.htm to http://europa.eu/abc/history/2000_today/index_en.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081217180807/http://earth.geology.yale.edu/RETREAT/maps/Mediterranean%20map2001sheet1%20tectonics&kinematics.jpg to http://earth.geology.yale.edu/RETREAT/maps/Mediterranean%20map2001sheet1%20tectonics&kinematics.jpg
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120113172538/https://mitc.gov.mt/page.aspx?pageid=52 to https://mitc.gov.mt/page.aspx?pageid=52
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070711220500/http://www.sahha.gov.mt/pages.aspx?page=156 to http://www.sahha.gov.mt/pages.aspx?page=156
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150705034428/http://www.ejc.net/media_landscape/article/malta/ to http://www.ejc.net/media_landscape/article/malta/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:29, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Albanian language in "Etymology" section

Until recently, the first sentences in the "Etymology" section were these: The origin of the term Malta is uncertain, and the modern-day variation derives from the Maltese language. The most common etymology is that the word Malta derives from the Greek word μέλι, meli, "honey".[25]

On 19 June, 109.92.110.197 (talk · contribs) edited the text as follows: The origin of the term Malta is uncertain, and the modern-day variation derives from the Maltese language. The most common etymology is that the word Malta derives from the Albanian Language word " Mjalta" referred to "Honey" , also from Greek word μέλι, meli, "honey".[23]

I have never heard that the word Malta derives from Albanian (and I can't think of any connection between Malta and Albania in ancient times). Moreover, I cannot find a source supporting this statement, except for this one which was written on 26 June 2015 (ie. after the statement was added to Wikipedia). For now, I removed the original sentence and added the following: The name Malta might also be derived from the Albanian word Mjalta, also meaning "honey".

If someone comes up with a reliable source re the Albanian origins of the word Malta, please add it instead of the unreliable one. I will also look for some info in books etc, but if nothing turns up, I will remove the sentence. Xwejnusgozo (talk) 15:41, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Maltese civilization

Hi. I have a questions:

1. in Malta, people who built the megalithic temples, Ħal-Saflieni Hypogeum, dolmens and tombs were civilization, like as Minoan civilization in Crete?
2. What are the name of these people?
3. What is the name of the phase/period (5,000-700 BC) when these people lived and built (based on the example Mycenaean Greece).

Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 19:33, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Little is known about the temple builders, since very little remains have survived apart from the actual temples and the remains found in those temples (such as pottery, statues, carvings etc). The period in which the temples were built (c.4000-2500 BC) is generally known as the "Temple Period", and the people who built it are sometimes referred to as the "temple builders" or "temple culture" (source: A Concise History of Malta by Carmel Cassar, 2002). Some sources (such as this website) describe the people as a civilization. Personally, I'm not sure if the Maltese temple builders were a civilization in their own right, or were part of a larger civilization which existed elsewhere as well. It is a known fact that they had links with the outside world (objects originating elsewhere in the Mediterranean were found in Maltese temples), however, since no similar structures have been found elsewhere, this would suggest that they were a separate civilization. I'll look a bit for some sources to better clarify these issues. Xwejnusgozo (talk) 21:32, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Generally, there are some publications using the name Maltese civilization ([9][10][11][12][13] etc) and many publications about this topic (the name does not matter), in total. I suggest that create a single article of Maltese civilization about these people and megalithic temples, Ħal-Saflieni Hypogeum, dolmens and tombs, based on many publications about this. This page opened my eyes (also this page use "cywilizacja maltańska" - en: Maltese civilization). Aside from a few articles (template), we should create one consolidated article about this. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 23:11, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Recent additions to the Article

Hallo, I reverted the last good faith additions to the article. There are several problems about them:

• Touristic guides, as the Rough guide, are not generally considered Reliable Sources for what concerns history;
• The claim that Malta was assigned to the Eastern Empire in 395 is dubious. The sources that I have say that the island followed the western part of the empire (as it is logical, since Sicily and Tripolitania belonged both to the western empire) then was occupied by the Vandals, then by the Ostrogoths and finally was conquered by Justinian in the sixth century.
• The Cambridge history source which should support the coming of Greek families points to the prehistoric cultures of the island. If one you want to use it, please give the page number where the arrival of these families is cited.
• Of course the Scilly islands have nothing to do with Malta.

Alex2006 (talk) 17:53, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

I copyedited the Roman part, adding info and reliable sources. I left for now the sentence about Greek "colonization" during the Byzantine period, although I could not find the page asserting it on the given reference. Feel free to correct and copyedit me if necessary. Alex2006 (talk) 06:49, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Name of country

The GC should be added after Malta's name in the heading.Royalcourtier (talk) 09:03, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 21 external links on Malta. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110406130024/http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/klu/adco/1998/00000020/00000001/00135717 to http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/klu/adco/1998/00000020/00000001/00135717#aff_1
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110827044831/http://www.legal-malta.com/law/constitution-1.htm to http://www.legal-malta.com/law/constitution-1.htm
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081212031419/http://users.aber.ac.uk:80/jpg/malta/arch.html to http://users.aber.ac.uk/jpg/malta/arch.html
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20141006130547/http://www.independent.com.mt/mobile/2011-10-02/news/retaining-guido-de-marcos-euro-mediterranean-vision-299521/ to http://www.independent.com.mt/mobile/2011-10-02/news/retaining-guido-de-marcos-euro-mediterranean-vision-299521/
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20141006130545/http://www.independent.com.mt/mobile/2013-04-17/news/10-years-ago-malta-signs-eu-accession-treaty-annaliza-borg-1409777665/ to http://www.independent.com.mt/mobile/2013-04-17/news/10-years-ago-malta-signs-eu-accession-treaty-annaliza-borg-1409777665/
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070929075606/http://www.legal-malta.com/law/constitution-1.htm to http://www.legal-malta.com/law/constitution-1.htm
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130616004627/http://www.maltadata.com/loc-act.pdf to http://www.maltadata.com/loc-act.pdf
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150511160742/http://www.aer.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/MainIssues/Regional_Democracy/AER_Regionalism_Report/Report_by_country/MALTA_2010.pdf to http://www.aer.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/MainIssues/Regional_Democracy/AER_Regionalism_Report/Report_by_country/MALTA_2010.pdf
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20141006080811/http://www.independent.com.mt/mobile/2005-07-14/news/incentives-to-boost-film-production-in-malta-77911/ to http://www.independent.com.mt/mobile/2005-07-14/news/incentives-to-boost-film-production-in-malta-77911/
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20101114021810/http://www.nso.gov.mt/statdoc/document_file.aspx?id=2701 to http://www.nso.gov.mt/statdoc/document_file.aspx?id=2701
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20071215013655/http://www.independent.com.mt/news.asp?newsitemid=57309 to http://www.independent.com.mt/news.asp?newsitemid=57309
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20091216064632/http://www.independent.com.mt:80/news.asp?newsitemid=61027 to http://www.independent.com.mt/news.asp?newsitemid=61027
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110920210030/http://www.nso.gov.mt:80/statdoc/document_file.aspx?id=1653 to http://www.nso.gov.mt/statdoc/document_file.aspx?id=1653
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070927190022/http://www.nso.gov.mt/statdoc/document_file.aspx?id=1719 to http://www.nso.gov.mt/statdoc/document_file.aspx?id=1719
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20141006114113/http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&plugin=1&language=en&pcode=tps00018 to http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&plugin=1&language=en&pcode=tps00018
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060907101948/http://www.nso.gov.mt:80/statdoc/document_file.aspx?id=1542 to http://www.nso.gov.mt/statdoc/document_file.aspx?id=1542
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060723083938/http://www.foreign.gov.mt/showdoc.aspx?id=210&filesource=4&file=Press%20release%20EU%20Commissioners%20300106.pdf to http://www.foreign.gov.mt/showdoc.aspx?id=210&filesource=4&file=Press%20release%20EU%20Commissioners%20300106.pdf
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060723083924/http://www.foreign.gov.mt/showdoc.aspx?id=210&filesource=4&file=Illegal%20Immigration%20-%20Statement%20for%20EU%20Ambassadors%20030706.pdf to http://www.foreign.gov.mt/showdoc.aspx?id=210&filesource=4&file=Illegal%20Immigration%20-%20Statement%20for%20EU%20Ambassadors%20030706.pdf
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060723083931/http://www.foreign.gov.mt/showdoc.aspx?id=96&filesource=4&file=ILLEGal%20Immigrants.pdf to http://www.foreign.gov.mt/showdoc.aspx?id=96&filesource=4&file=ILLEGal%20Immigrants.pdf
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130615055843/http://www.nso.gov.mt/statdoc/document_file.aspx?id=3424 to http://www.nso.gov.mt/statdoc/document_file.aspx?id=3424
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070613181149/http://www.omertaa.org/volumes/volume20071/index/index.html to http://www.omertaa.org/volumes/volume20071/index/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:49, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

All sources are confirmed to be working, with the exception of the top two links to Independent news articles. I will see what I can do about that.—♦♦ AMBER^(ЯʘCK) 21:35, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Malta. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090114113545/http://www.nso.gov.mt:80/statdoc/document_file.aspx?id=580 to http://www.nso.gov.mt/statdoc/document_file.aspx?id=580

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:06, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes, that works.—♦♦ AMBER^(ЯʘCK) 21:36, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Malta. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150705034428/http://www.ejc.net/media_landscape/article/malta/ to http://www.ejc.net/media_landscape/article/malta/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:20, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Let me adjust the link to something that does work.—♦♦ AMBER^(ЯʘCK) 10:32, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Malta. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.islandofgozo.org/history.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:47, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Malta. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for https://secure2.gov.mt/localgovernment/file.aspx?f=7810

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:29, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Better map

a better map

https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isola_di_Lampedusa#/media/File:Regione_Siciliana_topographic_map-blank.svg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.246.66.70 (talk) 16:39, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

I will have to disagree. That map doesn't show Malta very well, and mainly features Sicily.—♦♦ AMBER^(ЯʘCK) 11:25, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Largest city

@SpectreOfMalta: Rabat may be the largest LC by area, but much of the area consists of agricultural land. The urban area of Rabat is smaller by area than Birkirkara. Using land area, Żebbuġ is the largest city in Gozo, when it is in fact a medium-sized village. Xwejnusgozo (talk) 18:13, 24 May 2016 (UTC)