Page 274 of 328
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2017 5:02 pm
by eddydevries
Burdie wrote:
As Dutch City manager, I give all the new postcodes from The Netherlands a dot based on combination Postcode / Place given in Google map.
for Breskens (4511 RE) should that give coordinates 51.40427, 3.54284
In this case someone entered already a note in 26-9-2006 withe Breskens (4511 RE) But it is fixed by Inviterbo
I've seen entering notes both with and without space in the postcode.
Officially it's with the space, but I've seen lot of dot where both postcodes are plotted
.
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:32 am
by scrtr
The city
'Blankebergen' is misspelled, as it should be
'Blankenberge'.
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 7:46 pm
by tigerpranke
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Mon May 01, 2017 2:23 pm
by siriusLT
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Mon May 01, 2017 11:13 pm
by Burdie
Coordinates are already in. Please give us et least 48 hours the time to sort things out, as stated on the first post of this topic
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Sun May 14, 2017 8:14 am
by negative
Missing DOT for:
Mülheim an der Ruhr
51.415804, 6.907388
http://lt.eurobilltracker.com/notes/?id=175793352
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Sun May 14, 2017 8:56 am
by tigerpranke
Nothing wrong with
45470 Mülheim an der Ruhr since 2006
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Sun May 14, 2017 7:13 pm
by negative
tigerpranke wrote:
Nothing wrong with
45470 Mülheim an der Ruhr since 2006
Can I get a DOT?
- Mulheim.PNG (297.94 KiB) Viewed 1174 times
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Sun May 14, 2017 7:46 pm
by tigerpranke
You can't get this dot with postal code 45470, as it is located just east of the dot-border. 45468 will give you the dot.
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Tue May 16, 2017 9:42 pm
by scrtr
Zwevezele
The location of this place on the map seems to be wrong.
I had a
hit there with Wingene, which is only 4 km away from Zwevezele.
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Wed May 17, 2017 4:56 pm
by Burdie
scrtr wrote: Zwevezele
The location of this place on the map seems to be wrong.
I had a
hit there with Wingene, which is only 4 km away from Zwevezele.
I hope it is better now (5 km) The dot from Zwevezele was placed in Zwevegem (Kortrijk)
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Wed May 17, 2017 7:06 pm
by scrtr
Burdie wrote:scrtr wrote: Zwevezele
The location of this place on the map seems to be wrong.
I had a
hit there with Wingene, which is only 4 km away from Zwevezele.
I hope it is better now (5 km) The dot from Zwevezele was placed in Zwevegem (Kortrijk)
Much better, thanks!
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 4:13 pm
by vermeer
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 4:04 am
by ernanna
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 4:12 am
by ernanna