All I mentioned was that it was wasted effort. You on the other hand took great offense at a word. Come on man, lighten up!
If you studied any astronomy at all in college or grad school, the take away point was the insignificance of not only the Earth in reference to the Milky Way galaxy, but the insignificance of the Milky Way among galaxies.
One cannot pretend to be doing stellar cartography and then simultaneously ascribe some origin points to the Earth's location within our galaxy just because Star Trek does. It's not logical.
Yes, we're proud that Earth is the head of the Federation (strictly by being the location of the headquarters, not because Terrans would be more important as a species), but it's not in keeping with the main story of Star Trek and isn't science anymore when we fall into that trap. Worse, because trying to make celestial objects fit a fictional world, we then cannot ever be accurate.
Instead the most useful aspect of stellar cartography is to make it plausible such that fans can say, "Oh, now I see what the trip might have been like, or why it took this long, or this representation makes more sense now..." Those writers were and are not likely to astronomers.