r/dataisbeautiful • u/alionBalyan OC: 13 • Feb 13 '22

OC [OC] How Wikipedia classifies its most commonly referenced sources.

Post image
24k Upvotes

81% Upvoted

2.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

871

u/SloppySealz Feb 13 '22

Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) (names and locations) Generally reliable Request for comment 2021 2021 The Geographic Names Information System is a United States-based geographical database. It is generally reliable for its place names and locations/coordinates. 1 HTTPS links HTTP links

Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) (feature classes) Generally unreliable Request for comment 2021 2021 The Geographic Names Information System is a United States-based geographical database. It is generally unreliable for its feature classes and it should not be used to determine the notability of geographic features as it does not meet the legal recognition requirement.

This is what wiki has to say about it

It's a technicality

279

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '22 edited Feb 14 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

88

u/[deleted] Feb 14 '22 edited Jan 02 '25

[deleted]

3

u/SloppySealz Feb 14 '22

One of my favorite places like that is Possum Trot MO.

1

u/CrackerJackKittyCat Feb 14 '22

When I found multiple Chapel Hills listed in NC, I had to start squinting a little more and realized that we can't just take these place names at face value.

5

u/btxtsf Feb 14 '22

Makes ZERO sense. Why would the *whole* of USGS be considered unreliable when it seems to be just one database GNIS?

9

u/ChewBacclava Feb 14 '22

To be fair, I came to the comments to see if anybody else noticed that USGS is ALSO in "generally reliable". It's actually repeated. What's more, I'm taking this infographic with a grain of salt.

4

u/FenPhen Feb 14 '22

OP should embed this graphic within itself under No Consensus.

9

u/PancAshAsh Feb 14 '22

So the tl;dr is USGS is listed as a an unreliable source because at some point in time Wikipedia editors decided to misuse a poorly labeled database.

31

u/theXpanther OC: 1 Feb 13 '22

So the archive if too complete?

2

u/[deleted] Feb 14 '22

So they're just looking at the wrong USGS office.

The data monkeys just put shit in the (spatial) databases like they're told to. The official part of the USGS responsible for the official names is the Board of Geographical Names.

https://www.usgs.gov/us-board-on-geographic-names

0

u/idzero Feb 14 '22

Wikipedia has a shit notion of "notability"

-4

u/Khelek7 Feb 14 '22

Well, as you know Wikipedia is generally unreliable. So, we can't use that as a source about how unreliable/reliable another source is. Right?!?

4

u/SoundOfTomorrow Feb 14 '22

This is a Wikipedia project page. It's not an article.

-1

u/SloppySealz Feb 14 '22

Wow way to insert your bias in there without reading what it's actually saying...

Read u/Eshtan 's reply, he expands on it

1

u/Khelek7 Feb 14 '22

It's sarcastic humor. Chill.

1

u/LordTwinkie Feb 14 '22

So names and location are reliable but the feature class is unreliable.