This site was brand-new in 2011, and was still honestly in the process of figuring out what its scope was and wasn't.
Cut to 2020, and requests for sources are explicitly out of scope. The newer Question is perhaps not a request for sources, but the older one certainly was.
From our Help Center:
It is not about: … Asking for reference material
If you look through the question comments, you will in fact see traffic indicating both that the question was considered off-topic by a quorum worth of users in 2014, and that a decision was made to keep it open anyway due to its utility to this community, but to make it a wiki question (no reputation and no authorship on posts).
Now in the newer Q's case, I'm not 100% sure that topicality test applies. Its asking more how to generate your own historical maps, not for existing ones. It would also be useful enough to everyone here, that I personally would be inclined to leave it open. Perhaps it needs the historiography tag on it.
However, our usual fare is stuff that can be answered by talking about history, and this isn't that, so I'm not surprised others felt it was off-topic.
Going forward I'd suggest one of 2 things with the old question:
- We put the "Historical Significance" lock on that old question (so it doesn't get closed). This would prevent close votes, but also new answers, edits, and votes.
- Leave it as-is. (Protected and wikied)
For the new question:
If we chose 1, I'd suggest users go back and look at the new question as a historiography question, and consider if it might in fact actually be in scope from that viewpoint.
If we chose 2, we ought to consider if the second question should get the same treatment, and perhaps if this might become a standard treatment for questions about useful histography research techniques.