Good point Will, and to be honest I'm not entirely sure about the actual goal of the map yet. It's going to be published in a book about "surveillance and the environmental sciences during the Cold War".
Map 4 (Faroe-Shetland) v2b.jpg
Made some changes, mainly the bathymetry color.
You have "2000 m" in bold.
I was professionally involved in surveillance during the Cold War, and in fact it is likely that I know many of the contributors to this volume. In this context surveillance will refer mostly to acoustic undersea surveillance of submarines, which went under the rubric of SOSUS. (See http://www.navy.mil/...ue_25/sosus.htm for an authoritative summary written by one of my former colleagues.) This involved arrays of hydrophones laid at depths of several hundred meters at the head of slopes looking down toward deep water. As the article explains, best results were obtained where water depths reached 3500 m or more. For this reason I would suggest adding a 4000 m contour.
The environmental effects to be covered by the book will no doubt include studies of marine life that make noise that competes with the noise emitted by submarines, surface wind-driven waves, the temperature structure as a function of depth, bottom topography, and the movements of water masses. Individual articles will no doubt have maps and diagrams of their own. Thus your maps will provide general orientation, and for this purpose I would think they should serve very well.
Am I correct in assuming that the geographic limits were selected by the editors? That, for instance, the exclusion of the Denmark Strait was their choice rather than yours?
To an extent, some of the surveillance systems made redundant by the end of the Cold War have now been turned to the study of the marine environment.