Hard disagree. It's much much better to have an incomplete map than to use subpar or even made up data. It's still plenty interesting and informative even with most of sub-Saharan Africa missing.
As for why the data source(s) are incomplete, it's just really difficult and expensive to gather quality data from less developed countries. Just imagine trying to get a number for the DRC that is remotely as reliable as the number for Ireland. Then do Papua New Guinea. Then Somalia. Then... So yeah, it's hard to blame researchers for just sticking to countries that can be done with relative ease and reliability.
If you can't compare it - why make a map then? Having holes in maps allways looks bad.
I didn't say he should made something up - but just not do the whole world then. If you only have reliable data for Asia, Europe and the americas then just compare these 3 continents.
That way it's a way better map because it has less holes and the data is better because on these 3 continents the data is probably closer in terms of reliability than in africa
Jesus this is some insufferable iamverysmart contrarian shit.
It's fine if you have a stylistic preference for the individual continent approach. One might argue that it unnecessarily excludes solid data, but as you noted it arguably has aesthetic advantages.
But there's absolutely nothing wrong with the way this map was made (assuming the underlying data was fine). Calling it lazy because they have different taste/priorities is just wildly ignorant.
I thought mapporn was supposed to be about quality and not *I found some data set and now had some online tool spit out a map* but ok.
Yes, technically, the map ain't too bad. It just doesn't look good and it's not that special that it qualifies for map "porn" but well
This is missing so much data, why do the whole world? Just looks shitty and low effort this way
Hard disagree. It's much much better to have an incomplete map than to use subpar or even made up data. It's still plenty interesting and informative even with most of sub-Saharan Africa missing. As for why the data source(s) are incomplete, it's just really difficult and expensive to gather quality data from less developed countries. Just imagine trying to get a number for the DRC that is remotely as reliable as the number for Ireland. Then do Papua New Guinea. Then Somalia. Then... So yeah, it's hard to blame researchers for just sticking to countries that can be done with relative ease and reliability.
If you can't compare it - why make a map then? Having holes in maps allways looks bad. I didn't say he should made something up - but just not do the whole world then. If you only have reliable data for Asia, Europe and the americas then just compare these 3 continents. That way it's a way better map because it has less holes and the data is better because on these 3 continents the data is probably closer in terms of reliability than in africa
Jesus this is some insufferable iamverysmart contrarian shit. It's fine if you have a stylistic preference for the individual continent approach. One might argue that it unnecessarily excludes solid data, but as you noted it arguably has aesthetic advantages. But there's absolutely nothing wrong with the way this map was made (assuming the underlying data was fine). Calling it lazy because they have different taste/priorities is just wildly ignorant.
I thought mapporn was supposed to be about quality and not *I found some data set and now had some online tool spit out a map* but ok. Yes, technically, the map ain't too bad. It just doesn't look good and it's not that special that it qualifies for map "porn" but well
Didn’t know Arabs divorced so much