Page 173 of 343
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2011 2:00 am
by Elmo
My
Vilamayor is not near Zaragoza, but near Salamanca: 40,999 °N, 5,695 °W
Las Cantinas has coördinates 40,791 °N, 6,243 °W
Gallegos de Argañan has coördinates 40,630 °N, 6,702 °W
Alcaria has coördinates 40,200 °N, 7,519 °W
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:27 am
by yli
Elmo wrote:My
Vilamayor is not near Zaragoza, but near Salamanca: 40,999 °N, 5,695 °W
Las Cantinas has coördinates 40,791 °N, 6,243 °W
Gallegos de Argañan has coördinates 40,630 °N, 6,702 °W
Alcaria has coördinates 40,200 °N, 7,519 °W
Fixed - at least only this information.
I didn't do the administrave division of

La Cantinas and :flag-es Gallegos de Argañan.
Please next time put the country (or flag) before the name of the profile. I coun't find Alcaria in Spain.... but it was in Portugal.
And please write the co-ordinates like 40
.200 ,
-7
.519
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2011 5:47 pm
by dserrano5
yli wrote:I didn't do the administrave division of

La Cantinas and :flag-es Gallegos de Argañan.
I took care of this.
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2011 2:50 pm
by Kleman
Hi !
my bills from
Cénac (44° 46′ 51″ North 0° 27′ 33″ West) are now in a wrong profile (
Cénac et Saint Julien)
thanks for the help
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 7:52 pm
by Elmo
@yli and dseranno5: thanks for the job! I have three more villages for you:
Santa Catharina da Fonte do Bispo has coördinates 37.153, -7.788;
Gilvrazino has coördinates 37.158, -8.099;
Loriguilla has coördinates 39.490, -0.572.
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 9:37 pm
by CarlosManta
Hi Elmo!
Regarding the A22 highway in Portugal,
The A.S, Olhão is actually located in
Foupana (8700-073)
The location you mentioned is the name of the
freguesia (parish) and not the location.
For the A.S. Loulé you indicated "
Gilvrazino (8100-291)". The complete name for that location is "Cerro Gilvrazino".
I wonder how you found that post code, I don't find any link between Cerro Gilvrazino and A.S. Loulé. Was it in some receipt you got when buying something there?
Very close to the A.S. is a cement factory. In alternative I would use the post code from there...
Groetjes,
Carlos
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:24 pm
by Nick6502
This should be Berchem in Oost-Vlaanderen, not Antwerpen.
https://nl.eurobilltracker.com/notes/?id=102631052" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2011 1:18 pm
by Zjonbelz
My note from
Zittaart has been merged into the town profile of Meerhout, but in fact it is a seperate community within the municipallity of Meerhout. It has it's own townsigns.
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 8:06 pm
by mrfeanfan
coördinaten: 53.098959,5.799623
http://nl.eurobilltracker.com/profile/?city=181884" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2011 10:13 am
by eddydevries
Which note is this?
To plot a coordinate, one needs the note, not the cityprofile.
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2011 2:31 pm
by dserrano5
eddydevries wrote:
Which note is this?
To plot a coordinate, one needs the note, not the cityprofile.
Maybe I do things in a unique way, but "181884" is enough information for me to plot that location.
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2011 4:59 pm
by Crazy Bob
eddydevries wrote:
Which note is this?
To plot a coordinate, one needs the note, not the cityprofile.
http://eurobilltracker.com/notes/?id=102191251" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2011 4:42 pm
by yli
Friens and Zittaart have co-ordinates.
(I also don't need a note ID to correct stuff, just a name or city ID number is enough).
Personally I prefer things like "Friens doesn't have co-ordinates" instead of "city1234 should be merged with city5678"
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2011 6:07 pm
by yli
Please remove the czech "districts" 4096 to 4104 "Praha 2" till "Praha 10 i Praha 11". These are city districts and no districts of Czech Republic. There are no cities assigned to these non-existing profiles.
If looking at the profile of
Czech Republic there is now written
"Czech Republic consists of 14 Regions, 86 Districts and 250 Cities."
But it's only 77 districts, see
wikipedia
Also the name district should be okres.
Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2011 1:46 am
by Elmo
Hi Carlos!
I used Google Earth and Google Maps for finding the info about the Areas de Serviço along the A22.
CarlosManta wrote:The A.S, Olhão is actually located in Foupana (8700-073)
The location you mentioned is the name of the freguesia (parish) and not the location.
In that case
Foupana has coördinates 37.124, -7.771.
CarlosManta wrote:For the A.S. Loulé you indicated "Gilvrazino (8100-291)". The complete name for that location is "Cerro Gilvrazino".
I wonder how you found that post code, I don't find any link between Cerro Gilvrazino and A.S. Loulé. Was it in some receipt you got when buying something there?
Very close to the A.S. is a cement factory. In alternative I would use the post code from there...
I might as well have used
Canada do Parragil instead, according to Google Maps these two villages are extremely close to each other. Coördinates are 37.159, -8.099 (only 0.001° nore to the North than Gilvrazino).
Greetings and obrigado,
Jelmer