On 28/12/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
Since the AfD was started there have been only three edits to the article, and the only sources added are of the same kind. Am I really completely off-base in thinking that direct interpretation of maps and satellite photos is original research? I can't really see it as anything else.
I was going to just agree with you, but took a look at the article and took a look at one of the maps in question: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=34.839503,-92.152655&spn=0.00826,0.023732...
The map (which overlays a satellite photo) is pretty unambiguous. From the map one can see the ghost ramp, and can determine its coordinates. I could accept your point if we were talking about satellite photos only. But maps are symbolic representations of space; they are designed to be unambiguous and easily read.