You are right, embed is free. However, it will not do:
1) You can only put one marker -> would apply only to a subset of the maps we create.
2) You cannot use GPS coordinates.

I am working on splitting the map services used. E.g. I have implemented a site map with leafletjs based on mapbox. I will add a few more. In the end I plan to use google only for the complicated clustered maps (global, global tentative). Everything else will be pulled off google.

To prevent any costs from incurring I have also set a quota of 1000 hits a day. Which is too little as we regularly exceed this. So if you don't get a map, there is your reason.

I have decreased the quote even more. It resets at midnight Pacific Time. You will very likely run into the problem, though.

As a workaround, all sites offer links to google maps for each location.

I'm wondering, is there a place we could host a cached copy of the main maps (WHS and TWHS) off the website and just point to it for some of the more active users of this website? Perhaps from a forum post, I pretty much always have a copy or two of the maps open constantly as that is the sort of person I am.

Would that reduce the full usage on the main site, or is that of no real benefit in the grand scheme of things?

Nope. Problem is with google's new pricing policy which is really harsh and not supportive of community site as ours. Only mid term solution is to migrate away from google and I am working on that. It's likely that only the global and global tent map will remain with google as they contain some special features (clustering).

Some more topics I am thinking about.
* Load balancing of map providers. We would use google for some, here for others, ... In total we should be fine then.
* Load maps only on request, specifically user maps. There will be a button and you have to click it so the map shows.
* Only grant user maps to active community members. I do think it's a nice feature and filling out your profile / rating a few sites / writing a review could be expected as a prerequisite.

For some unknown reason when I last updated my site count today all my previous visits (and ratings!) vanished. Is there a way to go back to retrieve my ratings and avoiding re-entering them again? I re-updated my visited whs but wouldn't want to re-rate all the visited whs

Does not sound good. We had another member who had it before, and will try to find out what happened.
When I look at your profile now though, it all seems OK again?

Just having a look at some of the TWHS in Rio and I stumbled across a stray review on Sao Bento Monastery , it seems to also include Solivagant's review of Meroe.

I have a feeling something similar has happened before, but can't seem to find the post about it.

fixed it!

Regular reviewers having been adding a fair number of T List site reviews recently. We could be around 40% "complete" now (???) It could be interesting to track our status and progress.
Could the logic/routine which calculates and displays the total number of WHS and the number which have been reviewed on the Home page be replicated for T List sites. Either to be displayed on the home page, or, in some respects more logically, on the T List page?

I note by the way that reviews for Former T List sites appear with "(T)" - e.g Caspar's recent review of Stourhead. Should be "(FT)"?
I know you are not that interested in Former T List sites Els - but I personally find them of interest in helping to track the history of WHS both in general and in particular countries. I think that some of them ARE of value - more than some Inscribed and T List sites. Stourhead is such a case.
We still seem however to have problems with the "Site History" event list. Stourhead states
1995 Added
1996 Removed
"Added" to what and "Removed" from what ? The T List?? Would be clearer to say so? The potential for misunderstanding is compounded on the country page where the headings for "Former T List" are "Submitted" and "withdrawn". I am sure we have discussed this before but the result is still confusing/incorrect
In fact Stourhead was on UK's first T List submitted in 1985. See - http://whc.unesco.org/archive/1986/cc-86-conf003-2e.pdf
Caspar has (sensibly) concluded from this that Stourhead was submitted for nomination in 1995 - I can find no evidence that it was ever nominated. And neither was it "removed" from UK's T List in 1996 - it is still present on UK's 1998 T List!

The dates we have for UK "placings" on the T List for the 3 categories of
a. subsequently inscribed sites,
b. those still on the T LIst
c. those removed from the T List
seem to contain a lot of errors - I suspect partly because of the confusion about the titling of "events" (which means that other countries are likley to have similar problems?).
UK's second T List was created on Jan 1 1996 - but the ONLY difference between it and the original Sept 1989 was the ADDITION of Greenwich!! See - http://whc.unesco.org/archive/1996/whc-96-conf201-8e.pdf
But we are showing major changes in 1995!!! In fact, even SS Gt Britain remained on the T List until UK's THIRD T LIst (of 21/6/99. see http://whc.unesco.org/archive/1999/whc-99-conf209-10e.pdf ) - but we show it as "Removed" in 1988 on the site page and as "Withdrawn" on the UK Former T List page. We can't use a list with 2 columns to show multiple events (Added to T List, "Nominated"/"Withdrawn", "Removed from T List", Since by definition ALL sites in the Former T List group must have been both "added to" and "removed from" the T List we shouldn't mix in any nomination history but leave that, if present, on the site page.

If we can agree the "stages" we are to track, the "titles" we are to adopt and the columns we are to show on the Country page then I will go through UK's T List history and attempt to correct what we are showing

We earlier had agreed upon using this. I can extend it to "to/from T List", but it is fairly obvious I think.
The country page table should show the same labels (and has I think in the past), maybe we accidentally put back an earlier version. I will correct that. UPDATE: correction done, visible now at UK only but will automatically be refreshed today for other countries/(f)twhs


Often we did not know the years. I then just put them as "removed" a year later. Only detailed study of the country's nomination process can give clarity on this (and even then there's a lot that we don't know or cannot find the documents for). If someone presents me the right data I will correct it, but I don't want to put the effort into it to verify it all. There's so much else to do.

Will correct that too, seems also to be a versioning problem.

Wouldn't expect you to - but it is useful to know that the date of "removal from T List" has often been arrived at in that way by default. As regards the words we adopted for "placing on" and "removing from" the T List - it comes back to me now - the bigger "problem" was the use of the word "submitted" in the column for a country's former T List sites. I think that is what led Caspar to think that Stourhead had been "submitted for nomination".
But it looks good now for UK - thanks.
I will check the Added to T List and removed from T List dates for all UK sites

I noticed Aasivissuit–Nipisat does not appear on individual's map, neither as visited nor missing.

Fixed! Thanks for reporting it

Hello, is there any reason for former tentative sites to link to the UNESCO site? It seems to always link to an empty page, e.g.
http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/346
Could contents possibly come back?