From OpenGeofiction Encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Marked for Withdrawal

Probably a dumb question, but what exactly does marked for withdrawal mean? --Quarked (talk) 19:53, 18 April 2018 (CEST)

Just to clarify, "marked for withdrawal" territories still belong to their respective owners. "Marked for withdrawal" means that the owner has been inactive for some months, and the admin team has sent them a message asking if they plan to continue mapping their territory or not, with a reply-by date (May 15, in this case). In cases where the owner no longer wishes to continue, or where no reply is received by the deadline, these territories will revert to admin ownership, at which point they may be made available for individual claims or reserved for other purposes. --Isleño (talk) 17:33, 19 April 2018 (CEST)
I am deleting the mistakes I said before, hehehe -- BMSOUZA (talk) 16:28, 20 April 2018 (CEST)
It will be a shame if people abandon their territories; we have to deal with "Lost" countries. By the way, why Maafland and Byorn are marked for withdrawal when the owners are still active? (the last edit for Oxalia is only 23 days ago, and ddtuga is just one month ago.).--Happy mapping and God bleses you, ZK (talk) 16:33, 20 April 2018 (CEST)

Changing names

I have dismembered TA121 in three diferent countries: Brasonia, Belgravia and Luslandia. I read in the rules it was possible. Please, if any admin can change the name on this list and mark separately these countries in OverviewMap, I will thank very much. -- BMSOUZA 03 February 2015

Regarding this situation, I have renamed administative boundary inside OGF and, while it shows its name correctly, I can't see it well in the overview map, and in the table below. any help is welcome Renkon (talk) 18:51, 23 August 2015 (CEST)
I've updated it. Cheers, --Isleño (talk) 20:09, 23 August 2015 (CEST)

Unique Country IDs

Because of BMSOUZA's concern, above, along with many other users (myself included), the ogf:id field is not unique to a single country. I think we need to also keep close track of all the admin_level=2 relations (actual countries, AN-members, whatever we want to call them). I would like to add a separate column in this table for the relation id to this data, which can be the "official" relation id to be used when making data extracts, flagging country statuses, etc. I would also like to propose a new tag schema (with column in this table and tags on admin_level=2 relations): key = ogf:status, with value in { free, active, inactive, community (=all), collaborative }. I don't want to make changes to this table until it's OK'ed by other admins since I'm not sure if it isn't an extract of something Thilo is maintaining offline.--Luciano (talk) 00:31, 9 March 2015 (CET)

This page might become obsolete by the new overview map, so I wouldn't think to much about it at all. --Thilo (talk) 01:14, 9 March 2015 (CET)
Understood. I think for now we should maintain it for our own reference and to show our progress (to each other, anyway) in "cleaning up" the boundary relations.... Are you OK with the new tag suggestion: ogf:status ? Any thoughts or suggestions?--Luciano (talk) 01:21, 9 March 2015 (CET)
I don't really see the need for that. I will renew the "OGF:area table" tomorrow evening, which will show us the relations that are still broken. --Thilo (talk) 01:33, 9 March 2015 (CET)
OK. However, with respect to "polygon extraction", some relations that are not "broken" in the OSM database are nevertheless problematic and need to be modified in some way - I spent a long time with Karolia / Arataran, to fully "divorce" the two relations. Two examples I encountered this morning are Zylanda and Harda. The problems with these is that they are multiple polygons, and my extraction scripts aren't smart enough to put them together or clone them. A country like Harda can be made into a single relation in the same way I did with neighboring Mahhal - by moving the coastline offshore. Zylanda is more troublesome - it has a distant offshore territory. It really needs to be cloned or split in some way, with a separate relation id for the offshore part. Another example is the large offshore islands at Commonia - could (should?) these have their own separate relation and/or ogf:id?--Luciano (talk) 02:21, 9 March 2015 (CET)
Did you see the SVG file attached to one of my mails, where the multiple components of countries are grouped together. Apparently my extraction scripts are smarter than yours! The more relevant question is, if the "relation-to-polygon" template can handle non-contiguous relations. --Thilo (talk) 02:47, 9 March 2015 (CET)\
Heh. I have no doubt your scripts are smarter than mine. Mine are a nightmare, and I'm just borrowing things found online, mostly. Currently, relations-to-polygon work I'm doing (and, by the way, I have abandoned my templete idea because of the "transclusion" limit in the wiki, and I'm just building the multimaps invocation directly) can only handle a single polygon for each relation id. I'm using a hack based on Frederik Ramm's, which throws away all but one polygon associated with each relation id. Anyway, my only real innovation was to put the polygon info into the multimaps. If your extract script can generate actual long/lat coordinates on the nodes, they would probably work just as well or even better with minor adaptation. In the svg files, they are just pixel coordinates, and furthermore, on a non-mercator projection, hence difficult to convert back to long/lat, as required by the slippy maps.--Luciano (talk) 03:00, 9 March 2015 (CET)
Yes, it's possible, the construction of polygons from relations happens before coordinate conversion, which is only done for the SVG (connectedness, as a topological characteristic, is of course independent from map projection) --Thilo (talk) 03:13, 9 March 2015 (CET)
May I ask what your scripts are? It's possible I can't use them but I'd like to try... I'm not sure I could use them, as I'm only working at home on Korean-speaking Windows PC (which represents multiple handicaps for effective coding, especially with open-source materials - every single thing I download has some unicode or code-page problem).--Luciano (talk) 04:49, 9 March 2015 (CET)

O.k. - the Jørpenislands could be an independent country - only with friendly connections to Zylanda. I will have a look at the relations tomorrow. --Histor (talk) 02:30, 9 March 2015 (CET)

Actually, you don't have to make it independent! We only need to make two separate OSM relations.. they can both be called Zylanda easily, in the name of the relation, and the wiki articles can stay the same. I actually like the idea of some countries maintaining distant, offshore locations (e.g. Hawaii, or France's South Pacific possessions, etc.). But for sake of maintaining "ownership" info, I feel we need separate relations (and maybe separate ogf:id, but that is optional).

AR053 twice

Upon seeing the most recent version of the map, I noticed that area AR053 consists now of two parts on both sides of Řots. Is that a mistake or are both areas now linked? --Rasmus Rasmusson (talk) 13:17, 15 April 2015 (CEST)

That is an error. The eastern AR053 should be AR048. The error was in the "name" tag in the OGF data, not in the Territories map - it could be corrected via iD/Potlatch/JOSM--Luciano (talk) 13:34, 15 April 2015 (CEST)

Reserved areas

Have I just not noticed them before, or is "reserved area" a new category? What's it for? Thanks -- Pawl (talk) 11:58, 3 June 2015 (CEST)

UL027 (between Uletha and Tarephia) ever was shown as "reserved". The new reserved areas in most cases later become "free" after some changings. --Histor (talk) 19:18, 3 June 2015 (CEST)

UL052 with two users?

I had a question about UL052, which according to the map consists of two parts:

  1. The western island that according to the OGF:Territories page is owned by user alicefu (who doesn't seem to have mapped anything since 2013 however), but many edits have been made here by user GamePancakes
  2. (A part of) The eastern island that according to the OGF:Territories page is owned by user GamePancakes, but here he made only few edits.

Are there indeed two owners of this area, or is it just GamePancakes? Thanks, --Rasmus Rasmusson (talk) 10:51, 12 December 2015 (CET)

As far as I know and can recall, GamePancakes replaced alicefu as owner of all of UL052. It's likely just a mistake in the overview map. I will tentatively set the entire territory to GamePancakes ownership.--Luciano (talk) 12:24, 12 December 2015 (CET)

Splitting AR007

I've granted Nolara independence from Calliesanyo, so the relations have been split. I assume this change needs to be put on the territories map so I've listed it here.

  • Calliesanyo is relation #960, with ogf:id=AR007a (was AR007)
  • Nolarra is relation #18725, with ogf:id=AR007b (was originally part of AR007)

Also, if I need to make a change regarding Isle Dognemar (Was part of UL033a, now part of Calliesanyo [and therefore in the relation marked as AR007a]) please advise. At the moment, only Cimenoire is in the relation marked UL033a.

Reece202 (talk)

Hi Reece202. Your split of AR007 is noted, but since both countries are under the same owner, and the OGF:Territories map is mostly for the purpose of recording territory ownership, it will be a low priority to make the division "official" on this map. With respect to Dognemar (split from UL033a) - this is somewhat different. Although Dognemar is part of Calliesanyo, because it is a "remote overseas territory" I think the current practice to give it its own, separate administrative boundary relation with admin_level=2. Several examples of this include Jørpenilands (Zylanda) and the various territories of OIOI. There are also counter-examples with unified relations (e.g. Egani). I think you have freedom how it's implemented, but regardless, again because it is all under the same ownership, there is no priority to update the Territories map. When I get some free time I will probably go in and do a number of "aesthetic" updates, if one of the other admin doesn't get to it first.--Happy mapping - Luciano (talk) 01:15, 18 May 2016 (CEST)


There is a mistake on map. It says that UN1TY owns territory AR032a, which is my own as a description of edit says. It is probably a small mistake caused while copying, but I hope that it will be corrected before causing some consequences. Rustem Pasha (talk) 12:49, 12 March 2017 (CET)

Oops, fixed now. --Isleño (talk) 20:09, 12 March 2017 (CET)
Thank you Rustem Pasha (talk) 21:16, 12 March 2017 (CET)


I think that this county is too big for the region and should be split in to 3 differnent countries --Ilikemaps (talk) 10:14, 21 April 2017 (CEST)


I'm thinking that AN146, when eventually claimed (or if made collaborative) should be some sort of "Mongol" analogue (nomadic horse culture plains people who have only very recently been "civilized" and settled down). It's at the right latitude for the geographical context to make sense, and it's one of the only large enough remaining territories for this to work, and even though I'm only just starting I'm incorporating this in my nation's (immediately to the north) culture, geography and history. Williamsca97 (talk) 08:57, 18 June 2017 (CEST)


Hello! I named the country TA114c to Unglend, but it still says TA114c on the map. Can you fix this please? Tito_zz (talk) 14:02, 13 October 2017 (CEST)

That's because the map needs time to update. Give it a few hours or so and you'll see the name change. ParAvion (talk) 14:09, 13 October 2017 (CEST)

Source data

Hi everybody, I am currently working with Rémi to create a language map and I wanted to know if it was possible to directly access the source data of the overview map, which would be simpler than modifying the old data (ante-April 10).

Bye, Drapeau Surricie.png Talk to a Surrician 16:07, 25 November 2017 (CET)

Faseagonland will be marked as withdrawal

I have a break for months. --DkrotHome72 (talk) 09:45, 19 December 2017 (CET)


Hi, I have already give name to my country, but it's still shown there only as a code. Will it be shown when I'll create an article? Thanks. Qwertzuiop246 (talk) 17:38, 18 April 2018 (CEST)

Country names are not updated the overview map, since they change too often. However you can create a wiki article for AR009 and have it redirect to your country page. --Isleño (talk) 17:35, 19 April 2018 (CEST)


why hasn't this country been marked for withdrawal --Ilikemaps (talk) 06:14, 24 June 2018 (CEST)

There are many reasons why an inactive territory may not be marked for withdrawal. The owner may have recently been in communication with admin, or may have given advance notice of an extended absence, or may be dealing with various real life circumstances, etc. --Isleño (talk) 09:14, 24 June 2018 (CEST)

Error : Forbidden

Hi everyone ! I have this notification today when I try to reach the page : ERROR: Forbidden. When I close it, the map displays well but not the territories which there is above.

I am on Google Chrome. Have you also this problem ?

Drapeau Surricie.png Talk to a Surrician 23:19, 8 September 2018 (CEST)


I recently split UL073 into 4 territories. "Älved" is still UL073 and visible on the map.

But UL073a, UL073b and UL073c are missing.

Don't know if I forgot something or made it wrong on the boundary tag. The 4 territories are still active by me.

Broken map

Hi, the map is currently broken in two spots: near Rhododactylia, and near Ambroisie (AR041). Can somebody please fix this? Thanks. --Yoyo21 (talk) 17:03, 2 August 2019 (CEST)

South Ascot

Hey y'all, my country Baggo Askot or South Ascot doesn't even show up as a country on the OGF:Territories page. Currently, I own this country, but it seems I can't edit it in, so could I get an admin over here? Thanks. --CharlieG (talk) 21:25, 2 May 2020 (CEST)

You should contact the admin inbox. I'm not the relevant regional admin, but that territory - AN333b - was created by another user (not admin) and there's no request from you to admin for the territory, that I can see. /wangi (talk) 21:49, 2 May 2020 (CEST)