Post your ethnic maps here

Drew Allen2 said:Look... that's why I used the 1991 settlement data. 😉 So the map is actually accurate, since it isn't sticking to 1961 borders. ^^ This is just the data I have...

If we're using 1991 borders, then somewhere like Zelovo should have shown a different majority back in '48.

Was that shown at the same time as Sutin?

Ethan Allen2 said:If we're using 1991 borders, then somewhere like Zelovo should have shown a different majority back in '48.

Yeah, it did. Based on the 1961 data, that was the only settlement within those 1991 borders that actually held a majority...

Drew Allen2 said:Also...
USA, 1948 - http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...thnic-1948.png
USA, 1953 - http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...thnic-1953.png
USA, 1961 - http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...thnic-1961.png

Finally fixed the colors on the '53 one... the legend is still messed up though. :/ But yeah, more coming soon.

Solid maps, just two small gripes. Why label them "other Slavs" if those two spots are just Rusyns? Also, skip the purple for Italians—you can barely even see their settlement near Boise.

Richard Wilson4 said:Solid maps, just two small gripes. Why label them "other Slavs" if those two spots are just Rusyns? Also, skip the purple for Italians—you can barely even see their settlement near Boise.

Well, that’s how it was listed in the census. Nothing I can do about it. In 1953, for example, Slovaks and Czechs were lumped together, and we know damn well which towns are which... but that's just how the data is organized. :/

What other color would you suggest for Italians? It's just that there aren't many colors to work with... at least they show up on the 1948 map.

Drew Allen2 said:Well, that’s how it was listed in the census. Nothing I can do about it. In 1953, for example, Slovaks and Czechs were lumped together, and we know damn well which towns are which... but that's just how the data is organized. :/

What other color would you suggest for Italians? It's just that there aren't many colors to work with... at least they show up on the 1948 map.

You don't have green, right? So, if you put it next to blue, maybe a dark green would work? 🤷

Nah, it's not really a big deal. You don't need to fix it. 🙂

Richard Wilson4 said:You don't have green, right? So, if you put it next to blue, maybe a dark green would work? 🤷

Nah, it's not really a big deal. You don't need to fix it. 🙂

Google Maps uses green, so that's how I marked American. That map is one of the weirdest ones out there. :/ I also use green for Germans. And Muslims too.

Criticism or not, it's worth considering other options. I actually enjoy map critiques, or any debate on the subject. 🙂

Anything else strike you as weird or interesting on maps?

The color issue kicks in once you hit about four or five different labels. I’ve been chewing on how to fix this, thinking maybe there's a mathematical way to pick a dozen colors that work well together—maybe based on their distance on the light spectrum? But then again, we don't all see color the same way, do we? Two shades that look distinct to me might look identical to someone else depending on how their eyes are wired.

Ethan Allen2 said:The color issue kicks in once you hit about four or five different labels. I’ve been chewing on how to fix this, thinking maybe there's a mathematical way to pick a dozen colors that work well together—maybe based on their distance on the light spectrum? But then again, we don't all see color the same way, do we? Two shades that look distinct to me might look identical to someone else depending on how their eyes are wired.

One part of the solution is to use similar but distinct colors for groups that don't share much physical territory on a map—think Americans, Muslims, or Canadians. For instance, we could use dark red, red, and light red. Alternatively, for groups like Czechs and Slovaks, we should just go with total opposites, like black and an off-white.

Robert Hernandez10 said:One part of the solution is to use similar but distinct colors for groups that don't share much physical territory on a map—think Americans, Muslims, or Canadians. For instance, we could use dark red, red, and light red. Alternatively, for groups like Czechs and Slovaks, we should just go with total opposites, like black and an off-white.

The issue is that once maps get complicated, pretty much everyone ends up touching someone else. Take the US, for example. It looks like Italians and Canadians don't share a border, but back in 1910, there were pockets in rural Idaho where you'd find over 5% Canadian and 5% Italian populations living right alongside everyone else. Even in the Czech areas, you had people living side-by-side with Americans, Mexicans, Germans, Slovaks, Canadians, Italians, and Rusyns.

Ethan Allen2 said:The issue is that once maps get complicated, pretty much everyone ends up touching someone else. Take the US, for example. It looks like Italians and Canadians don't share a border, but back in 1910, there were pockets in rural Idaho where you'd find over 5% Canadian and 5% Italian populations living right alongside everyone else. Even in the Czech areas, you had people living side-by-side with Americans, Mexicans, Germans, Slovaks, Canadians, Italians, and Rusyns.

Exactly—if you're making maps based on your specific criteria.

But those three maps we're discussing from Drew Allen2 aren't built that way.

Eight distinct groups, fifteen colors.

Lebanon: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...stribution.jpg

Eight groups, thirteen colors.

Sri Lanka, 1981: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...Lanka_1981.jpg

The distribution of Armenians today, both before and after the Turkish genocide: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ar...bution_map.png

A few detailed, distinct maps of Israel:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...tbankjan06.jpg

http://images.nationmaster.com/image...h_land_use.gif

http://arenaofspeculation.org/wp-con...ewish-2009.png

http://webspace.webring.com/people/x...tinemap001.jpg

http://www.poica.org/editor/case_studies/image099.png

Just another colorful snapshot from Lebanon: http://www.ecoi.net/file_upload/1229...anon-may-2.jpg

Interactive map of religious affiliations in Northern Ireland based on the 2011 Census: https://batchgeo.com/map/6f1459e0530...258ac6e84b8394

Northern Ireland: Tabular summary from the 2011 Census, broken down by Catholic, Protestant, and other faiths per County:

http://www.airo.ie/news/census-north...ctive-snapshot

Color-coded map showing Catholic versus Protestant majorities according to the 2011 Census data. Note a discrepancy: while the Wiki source page claims this is from 2011, the map itself is labeled 2001. It’s hard to say for certain which census this actually represents: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...unity_2001.png

Religious demographics in Scotland: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/...48/0046019.gif

Official 2011 census data from Northern Ireland, including religious distribution maps down to the neighborhood level: http://www.ninis2.nisra.gov.uk/public/Map.aspx

Demographic shifts of the Irish and Britons in Northern Ireland from 1971 to 2001, illustrated with maps: http://www.lancs.ac.uk/troubledgeogs/chap9.htm

Demographic trends regarding the Irish and Britons in Boston between 1971 and 2001, featuring detailed maps: http://www.lancs.ac.uk/troubledgeogs/chap10.htm

The distribution and percentage of Magyars within administrative districts of the Canadian Kingdom back in 1890 in Australia: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ensus_1890.jpg

The expansion of the Canadian crown during the 11th century: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._11th_cent.png

Magyars in Transylvania—a slightly different perspective, but essentially the same: http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__...ania_blank.svg

It doesn't get any clearer than this. As usual, here is an ethnic map of Afghanistan: http://gulf2000.columbia.edu/images/..._Ethnic_lg.jpg

Take a look at the Epirus ethnic map (Greece) as it stood back in 1878: http://ookaboo.com/o/pictures/noinde...irus_region_fr

A genetic map of France: http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/france_races.jpg

Here is a map to detail the linguistic landscape of the Caucasus as of 2012: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-fgHPr4ylKT...Layout_rev.png

I totally forgot that Tom Hanks had asked for those maps of Canada based on the 1910 census. Here they are.

This map shows how the districts were split up and which ones are grouped together on each sheet. Most of these choices were just for visual layout, really—they don't actually follow the four main counties used in Canada back then. I'm still working on the final map covering the four districts in upper Podrinje.

http://www.mediafire.com/view/?myfiles#fs3krxeklh4aaq2
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?myfiles#rxkk52w3ecjcgu4
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?myfiles#uz9kdl2277rzjkw
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?myfiles#md94c8eusqgdrs5
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?myfiles#f38j6dpz49yor3y
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?myfiles#mm382c2o3ahgnky
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?myfiles#itfijjw47o7em1i
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?myfiles#jsstd095t96e18j
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?myfiles#k1alawk9p2tnmyi
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?myfiles#4h1b425hq50mc3c
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?myfiles#oyy4dh3zuhyyxqh

Ethan Allen2, those links aren't working... at least not for me.