Page 271 of 342

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2016 11:34 am
by Burdie
siriusLT wrote:Please add coordinates for :flag-lv: Vendzavas and Ulmale:

https://en.eurobilltracker.com/profile/?city=223375
Vendzavas 57 ° 10 '44 "N, 21 ° 40 '31" E
lv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vendzavas_(Užavas_pagasts)

https://en.eurobilltracker.com/profile/?city=223376
Ulmale 56° 56′ 10″ N, 21° 16′ 35″ E
lv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulmale

All done. I also found a few other :flag-lv: profiles without a dot. Thanks for that

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2016 9:14 am
by negative

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2016 2:40 pm
by Burdie
negative wrote::flag-lt: Svencionys (wrong spelling) http://lt.eurobilltracker.com/profile/?city=223816
must be merged with
:flag-lt: Švenčionys http://lt.eurobilltracker.com/profile/?city=219402

Roma http://lt.eurobilltracker.com/profile/?city=225168
should be in :flag-it: Italy
:)

All Sorted and I found also 3 more :flag-lt: cityprifiles without a dot :)

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2016 10:51 pm
by Fons
When viewing the city profile of Naples there's something wrong with the small map right above. Wrong part of the world and obviously no dot to be find.

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Fri Nov 18, 2016 1:16 am
by Burdie
Fons wrote:When viewing the city profile of Naples there's something wrong with the small map right above. Wrong part of the world and obviously no dot to be find.
I found a coordinate from napels without a digital point 40xxx iso 40.xxx and showed a dot somewhere in de artic ocean. map shown is still not correct, but I think it is in the catch. I hope after tomorrow it is showing correct

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2016 4:43 pm
by groentje
I was away, last 2 weeks, and got notes in some new and semi-new places.

Hronská Dúbrava is an apparant newcomer. According to Wikipedia, it's at 48.583333 N, 19 E, belonging to the Banskobystrický Region, and the Žiar nad Hronom District.

Tiszacsernyő is the Hungarian name for Čierna nad Tisou, so they can be merged. According to Wikipedia, 60% of the population is Hungarian, which is why I chose to use the Hungarian name.

Shegyni is just a different translitteration for Shehyni, I used it because it was proposed by the Ukrainian postal service. They can be merged.

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2016 8:08 pm
by Burdie
groentje wrote:I was away, last 2 weeks, and got notes in some new and semi-new places.

Hronská Dúbrava is an apparant newcomer. According to Wikipedia, it's at 48.583333 N, 19 E, belonging to the Banskobystrický Region, and the Žiar nad Hronom District.

Tiszacsernyő is the Hungarian name for Čierna nad Tisou, so they can be merged. According to Wikipedia, 60% of the population is Hungarian, which is why I chose to use the Hungarian name.

Shegyni is just a different translitteration for Shehyni, I used it because it was proposed by the Ukrainian postal service. They can be merged.
All done, thanks

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 9:19 pm
by vermeer
Klein Genhout (Kelmond was also possible; had to make a choice)

https://nl.eurobilltracker.com/notes/?id=171200171

50.921518, 5.807994

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 10:53 pm
by Burdie
vermeer wrote:Klein Genhout (Kelmond was also possible; had to make a choice)

https://nl.eurobilltracker.com/notes/?id=171200171

50.921518, 5.807994
Ik heb me laten leiden door wiki en daar EBT al een city profiel had van Genhout waar ook al Groot Genhout was geplaats. Vandaar dat hij ook daaronder is geplaatst. De Coordinaten zijn wel van Klein Genhout

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2016 2:47 pm
by siriusLT
:flag-lt: Rusne https://en.eurobilltracker.com/profile/?city=227166

should be:
:flag-lt: Rusnė with coordinates 55°17′49″N 21°22′41″E

https://lt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rusn%C4%97

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2016 3:18 pm
by Raumi
siriusLT wrote: :flag-lt: Rusne should be :flag-lt: Rusnė with coordinates 55°17′49″N 21°22′41″E
Done! Thanks for spotting!

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2016 9:55 am
by negative
missing dots:

:flag-lt: Varėna 65186
54.210811, 24.577738
http://lt.eurobilltracker.com/notes/?id=171666168

:flag-lt: Eišiškės 17173
54.168889, 24.991701
http://lt.eurobilltracker.com/notes/?id=171666029

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2016 11:29 am
by LArdennais
negative wrote:missing dots:

:flag-lt: Varėna 65186
54.210811, 24.577738
http://lt.eurobilltracker.com/notes/?id=171666168

:flag-lt: Eišiškės 17173
54.168889, 24.991701
http://lt.eurobilltracker.com/notes/?id=171666029
Done.

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2017 12:49 am
by Elmo
I just found out that somebody mistakenly put Marigot (Guadeloupe) together with Marigot (Saint-Martin), but obviously they are not the same. The coordinates are 16.0856504, -61.7729044.

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2017 11:00 am
by tigerpranke
Elmo wrote:I just found out that somebody mistakenly put Marigot (Guadeloupe) together with Marigot (Saint-Martin), but obviously they are not the same. The coordinates are 16.0856504, -61.7729044.
Fixed.