
Best of best - Having researched most atlases at both public and university libraries, I am in the position to state this is the best atlas in the world, best of the best. Although I am only talking about the atlas quality and not the price.
What is going on? - This is a beautiful book, one which I almost passed over because of the very low rating.Does no one at Amazon edit these reviews? Virtually all of the 1 or 2 star ratings are about one (possibly inappropriately-applied) name that provoked intense nationalistic fervor and a semi-comprehensible rant which has nothing to do with the overall quality of the atlas. Some of them even accused National Geographic of having been bought out by enemies of certain nations. Get a grip...
National Geographic has made changes - In December 2004, National Geographic (NG) updated the Persian Gulf plate (Plate 75) to accomodate the controversies surrounding the place-names used in the 8th edition. Here is my understanding of the changes made:1. The term ",Arabian Gulf", in parenthesis has been deleted. Instead, there is a small note that reads: ",Historically and commonly known as the Persian Gulf, this body of water is also referred by some as the Arabian Gulf.",2. Persian names of all Iranian islands are used. (Kish instead of Qeys, Lavan alone instead of adding Sheykh Sha eyb in parenthesis)3. Deletion of ",Occupied by Iran (Claimed by U.A.E.)", in reference to the islands Abu Musa, and Greater and Lesser Tunbs.These changes already appear on the website (www.nationalgeographic.com/mapmachine) and will apply to further printings or editions of the NG Atlas. Also, on the password-protected website for NG Atlas owners, there is a ",brief summary of the historical origin of the term Persian Gulf",. There is also a note on the place-naming policy of NG. (The online update feature is great - you can download and/or print updated plates and put them in your atlas. This not new for NG Atlases, except that they used to send updates by mail.)Overall, I am impressed with NG s response to this situation. I am also very impressed with the quality of the atlas and its contents, except for the outermost/superficial binding paper. I have had the atlas for about 6 months, and with moderate use, the paper around the bottom of the spine has frayed. The binding itself is intact, though.
Reviews are helpful written in English - I d agree that the book could use some revision. It s funny that most people complaining about the content seem to have difficulty forming actual sentences! Maybe you had difficulty reading the book in general?
Not accurate! - To remain a valid international reference, this book is supposed to be more accurate in names(such as Persian Gulf)and indifferent about false data!