Talk:Treasure map

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

OED[edit]

The OED has no entry for "treasure map". It has:

treasure-box, -chamber, -chest, -coffer, -digger, -galleon, -giver, hoard, -hunter, -hutch, -keeper, -room, -seeker, -ship, -store, -vault, etc..

I guess "treasure map" falls under the "etc" category. --Stbalbach 00:05, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of movies[edit]

I've removed the list of movies which include treasure maps (which was listed under the "See also" section). It's inappropriate to make a list of every work in popular culture that has a treasure map. If someone wants to write actual prose and say why that movie/book is notable, that's fine, but a random list is trivia and open-ended. -- Stbalbach 14:09, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. The list hasn't grown appreciably and so seems to be no threat of overwhelming the article. And the movies cited are good examples of where a treasure map is an important element of the plot.
Atlant 14:24, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I'm willing to compromise if theres is actually something said about the maps and why they are notable and not just a mute list. -- Stbalbach 16:00, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'll get to work on that.
Atlant 16:13, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nature of article[edit]

This article is about a fictional literary device, no real pirate treasure maps existed, we can't speak of them in a general sense. Treasure maps are entirely fictional and we can trace exactly what maps exist (in literary form), when they were created, by who and for what purpose. The are factual details about specific maps we can discuss. It is incorrect that all treasure maps look like Stevenson's original concept, as the article shows. -- Stbalbach 15:27, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So you are saying that this article should only be about Stevenson's treasure map? That's pretty myopic. Simply because he came up with the idea does not mean that the article cannot talk about this object in a more general sense. PMHauge 17:53, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And by the way, there have been plenty of real treasure maps throughout history. You can buy replicas here: http://www.bc-alter.net/dfriesen/treasuremaps.htm This article must be expanded. PMHauge 17:57, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above link was deleted and marked as link spam. Please note that the intention of the link is to not get people to buy anything off of this website. The link was simply to quickly demonstrate that the idea of treasure maps being a thing of myth is absurd. Whether they are inspired by Stevenson or not, real treasure maps DO exist and this article WILL and MUST be updated to reflect this. PMHauge 22:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you're not trying to sell anything, then you don't need to link the actual website. I've deleted it again and would suggest you not repost it.
Atlant 23:08, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry. Is that a threat? PMHauge 23:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's a warning from an administrator of the encyclopedia. Please be sure to read WP:EL. If one uses the encyclopedia to promote links that are commercial, that link to websites under your control, or violate several other provisos, those are violations of the external links policy and will lead to escalating warnings, and possible, temporary or permanent blocking of one's ability to edit the encyclopedia.
Atlant 13:03, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, but perhaps you should read WP:EL as well. First off, the link I posted was not in the article, it was mentioned in the talk page as WP:EL recommends one does. Second, and I think I made this pretty clear, the link is not owned, maintained, or affiliated with me in anyway. Third, the link was only being used to puncuate a point that I was making in my comment regarding the widely accepted authenticity of treasure maps. While I respect your status as an administrator of Wikipedia, I find your decision to remove a link from an articles talk page not only be a poor one, but also completely contrary to the goals of Wikipedia. The link has been replaced and I am confident that I have done so with the policies and procedures of Wikipedia behind me. PMHauge 13:42, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think you may have missed this portion of the sentence I think you're referring to in WP:EL: If the link is to a relevant and informative site that should otherwise be included, please consider mentioning it on the talk page and let neutral and independent Wikipedia editors decide whether to add it. This link you're "mentioning" is not a link that should otherwise be included (it's purely a "selling" site) and we do not use talk pages as a way to sneak linkspam into the Encyclopedia. Also, this sentence appears in a section discussing "conflicts of interest". Under WP:AGF, I accept your assurances that you have no conflict of interest in mentioning this site, but since there's no conflict of interest, the talk page "escape clause" doesn't apply.
I'll mention this over at the administrator's noticeboard so that other, un-involved administrators can take a look and see what they think.
Atlant 14:18, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#How closely do we enforce WP:EL on talk pages?.
Atlant 14:23, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This sounds perfectly fair and reasonable. I appreciate your willingness and the effort to have others weigh in on this. Regardless of the outcome, I hope that at the very least that putting an end to such a debate will only help refocus efforts to help further expand this article. PMHauge 14:30, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

<reset indent>
Links on anything other than articles have "no follow" on them so they do nothing for search engine optimisation, thus the links guideline is not normally rigidly enforced on talk pages. This means that moving disputed links to talk is normally the thing to do.

But this is an egregious example, and while I see nothing in the edit history to make me think PMHauge is a spammer, I don't see that this link is even remotely within the realm of things that would be considered to get into the parking lot to watch a film on links that have a tiny chance of staying in an article.

brenneman 14:35, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reality vs. fiction[edit]

This article has been mistakenly composed to deal with treasure maps in only a fictional sense. The fact remains that treasure maps did not come simply from the imagination of one author, as I have recently added to the article. I will point out that the title of this article is not Pirate Treasure Maps, but is simply rather Treasure Map. This article should be broken up to deal with these maps in both the fictional and non-fictional sense, as I intend to do. Regardless if reality has been imitating art, or vice versa, maps leading to treasure DO exist, and anyone disputing this can be proven wrong by anyone else who decides to bury something, and then draw a map to its location. PMHauge 06:13, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the article was originally focused on Pirate treasure maps, which, despite that external links items for sale, I don't believe pirate treasure maps ever existed in reality. Are you sure other treasure maps existed before literature created the idea? I agree it does seem logical they would, but what are they? Also if you want to focus the article on treasure maps in general, why the stereotypical description of treasure maps which is just a re-hash of the stereotype that Stevenson created (or really popularized). -- Stbalbach 16:21, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I guess I don't see why the article has to focus on pirate treasure maps. It seems important to highlight the stereotypes of treasure maps, but I think there is some historical stuff that can be added. For example, as far back as 1595, Sir Walter Raleigh had set out on expeditions to search for Eldorado, a mythical city of gold. Several maps had been used in this expedition, and from his maps created during his expeditions, other cartographers included Eldorado on their maps of South America. I have some books that I will use as reference in the article. Treasure Hunters continue to exist today and seek out fortunes based on sometimes crude maps of shipwrecks, or other encoded charts. PMHauge 16:34, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just saying, this article was about pirate treasure maps, but I'm not advocating it stay that way, but it was correct in that context. -- Stbalbach 14:08, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Check out this site on Captain Kidd: http://www.pfrh.supanet.com/HISTORYBODY.htm and then this one which appears to be from the same author, but under an updated URL http://www.captainkidd.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/THECHARTS.htm It would appear that Captain Kidd did have some maps out there leading to his treasure. I really hate to delete your reference again, but I think it is clear that treasure maps have and do exist, as well as pirate treasure maps. Whether it was Cooper or Stevenson who first put the idea of a treasure map into fiction, it seems quite obvious that the device of a treasure map did not spring from their own imagination. PMHauge 17:03, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, those are some controversial sites, I wouldn't call them reliable sources. The scholarly sources from the professionals say: no pirate treasure maps. -- Stbalbach 14:05, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The author Edward Rowe Snow provides details of successful treasure hunts that he’s conducted using an old pirate treasure map and also independent instructions (that is, not accompanied by a map.) So, if one believes his accounts then treasure maps exist, but if one decides that he’s no scholar then, maybe, they don’t. As the publications would be considered RS then, surely, one might acknowledge from the outset that (pirate) treasure maps do exist historically. I respectfully submit that if scholars and professionals have not discovered such material in their research, or have omitted to inform their readership of its existence, then they’re not exactly scholarly or professional, and perhaps deserve not to be referenced as authorities! Megarak (talk) 19:59, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The subject matter of the above web sites - the so-called Palmer and Wilkins Kidd treasure maps - is well documented in published sources. So, why not refer to these RS publications instead? Megarak (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Treasure Maps and Treasure Directions[edit]

I was about ready to delete the sentence of the article regarding National Treasure due to the fact that there isn't an actual map per-say used in the film. What I think the author of this sentence was referring to is the cryptogram on the back of the Declaration of Independence that gave the characters vague and cryptic directions on how to find the treasure. This got me thinking about how such things should be incorporated into the article since they do seem related. In The Gold Bug by Edgar Allen Poe, the character stumble upon a cryptogram which read as follows: 

53‡‡†305))6*;4826)4‡.)4‡);806*;48†8
¶60))85;1‡(;:‡*8†83(88)5*†;46(;88*96
*?;8)*‡(;485);5*†2:*‡(;4956*2(5*—4)8
¶8*;4069285);)6†8)4‡‡;1(‡9;48081;8:8‡
1;48†85;4)485†528806*81(‡9;48;(88;4
(‡?34;48)4‡;161;:188;‡?;

The decoded message is: 

A good glass in the bishop's hostel in the devil's seat
forty-one degrees and thirteen minutes northeast and by north
main branch seventh limb east side shoot from the left eye of the death's-head
a bee line from the tree through the shot fifty feet out.

Once again, we are not dealing with a map here, but rather directions that lead to a buried treasure. While I am not proposing an article be created entitled Treasure Directions, I'm looking for some feedback as to how these variations can and/or should be incorporated. Perhaps I'll take a pass at it myself, but I'd like to hear others thoughts. PMHauge 14:12, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure you could write a book about it and extend the meaning of "treasure map" in many directions. At some point it becomes original research to call things Treasure Maps without support from a RS, but it depends on how it is worded. -- Stbalbach 14:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Check[edit]

Can someone more familiar with Wikipedia's reliable sources guidelines help me out and tell me what you think of these sites:

Good to use, or garbage? For my own edification, and that of others, please explain which sites you think are appropriate to use and cite, and why others are not. PMHauge 18:08, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed on www.kiddsisland.com they keep using an example of a flat island as the geography for Kidd's 20 Turtle Island map--A Tour of Kidd's Island (Page 2). Better reference is the adventure memoir by the teenage photojournalist at the time Cork Graham, who found it off the west coast of Vietnam. Book's good and definitely more plausible considering the topography on the map that describes a ridged island and photo is of a flat one. The Vietnamese island was even titled Grand Pirates Island by the colonial French. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.61.107.234 (talk) 19:26, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, per RS, this is a reliable source:
  • The material has been thoroughly vetted by the scholarly community. This means published in peer-reviewed sources, and reviewed and judged acceptable scholarship by the academic journals.
  • Items that are recommended in scholarly bibliographies are preferred.
It then goes on how to deal with sources that don't fit that criteria. It really depends what kind of information is being used from these sites. If it's like the Captain Kidd stuff above, claiming he had a treasure map, which is in direct contrast to what people like the British Library and pirate scholars say - it wouldn't be reliable, except perhaps under a "alternative theories" kind of section (see Great Sphinx of Giza for example). -- Stbalbach 14:15, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Does your reference that says pirates had NO maps make any mention of the Kidd map? Everything I read says that Stevenson and Cooper were influenced by Kidd, and it just sounds hard to belive that the concept of a treasure map is a wholly original and fictitious idea. I think the article has already moved in the direction that it should be and is getting close to accurately reporting on treasure maps, but as far as pirate treasure maps go, it still needs some careful attention. PMHauge 15:10, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I'm getting warmer. Lucky for me, the book you cite is on Amazon and you can search inside and find the excerpt you are referring to. I've checked out a couple of other book on there using this method and they back up the claim that no pirate treasure maps have been preserved. I've found some other books that explain the whole thing a little better and detail how the Kidd map shown on the websites above came into being. I'll try to get the new information up later today. PMHauge 15:46, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duplication[edit]

Much of this article is a copy-paste of stuff already in the treasure article. See Talk:Treasure#Duplication. Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 15:04, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copper Scroll[edit]

Is not a map. 139.138.6.121 (talk) 01:53, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Treasure_map&oldid=1201310140"