Page 317 of 335

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2022 9:05 pm
by Elmo
I have spotted some missing dots in my dotmap:

:flag-fr: Lieu-dit Les Roches has coordinates 45.116, 6.086 (it is part of the municipality of Huez, but it is in another dot).
:flag-fr: Les Quintrands has coordinates 43.852, 5.818 (it is part of the municipality of Manosque, but it is in another dot).
:flag-es: Barakaldo has coordinates 43.289, -3.011.
:flag-es: Piedras Blancas has coordinates 43.561, -5.977.
This :flag-es: Salcedo is in Asturias and not in Ponevedra. The coordinates are 43.531, -6.697.
:flag-pt: Avelar with post code 3240-302 has coordinates 39.918, -8.360. (IMHO, in Portugal, every post sode should have its own coordinates, I am not sure if the Portuguese do this?)
:flag-es: Peñarroya-Pueblonuevo is divided into two dots. I have enterd them in Peñarroya-Pueblonuevo-Este and Peñarroya-Pueblonuevo-Oeste. They have all been placed in the eastern dot. The western dot has coordinates 38.301, -5.272.
:flag-es: Puente de la Cerrada has coordinates 37.958, -3.189.

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Sat Mar 26, 2022 2:57 am
by lmviterbo
Elmo wrote: Fri Mar 25, 2022 9:05 pm:flag-pt: Avelar[/url] with post code 3240-302 has coordinates 39.918, -8.360. (IMHO, in Portugal, every post sode should have its own coordinates, I am not sure if the Portuguese do this?)
We do. 😎

Please change your postal code to the correct one:

3240-316

This one has coordinates already. I may have to set them again after you change the postal code though, because locations with zero notes are automatically deleted after a very short period of time.

I know you saw your postal code somewhere but unfortunately it's not uncommon for companies to show their own postal codes wrong, not for Google to show the wrong postal codes for companies. 3240-302 does not exist in fact.

Cheers!

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Sat Mar 26, 2022 11:17 am
by Burdie
Elmo, I think Spain is now OK for you. I changed Peñarroya-Pueblonuevo-Oeste and Salcedo. The other places were already dotted

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Sat Mar 26, 2022 2:24 pm
by Elmo
lmviterbo wrote: Sat Mar 26, 2022 2:57 am
Elmo wrote: Fri Mar 25, 2022 9:05 pm:flag-pt: Avelar[/url] with post code 3240-302 has coordinates 39.918, -8.360. (IMHO, in Portugal, every post sode should have its own coordinates, I am not sure if the Portuguese do this?)
We do. 😎

Please change your postal code to the correct one:

3240-316

This one has coordinates already. I may have to set them again after you change the postal code though, because locations with zero notes are automatically deleted after a very short period of time.

I know you saw your postal code somewhere but unfortunately it's not uncommon for companies to show their own postal codes wrong, not for Google to show the wrong postal codes for companies. 3240-302 does not exist in fact.

Cheers!
Tkanks for your advice! I have changed the post code. The dot is correct now. :)

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Sat Mar 26, 2022 2:25 pm
by Elmo
Burdie wrote: Sat Mar 26, 2022 11:17 am Elmo, I think Spain is now OK for you. I changed Peñarroya-Pueblonuevo-Oeste and Salcedo. The other places were already dotted
Thanks for your effort, Burdie! Unfortunately the other dots are still wrong. They are dotted, but they are dotted in the wrong dot. And the same is true for the two French dots.

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2022 11:52 pm
by Burdie
Elmo wrote: Sat Mar 26, 2022 2:25 pm
Burdie wrote: Sat Mar 26, 2022 11:17 am Elmo, I think Spain is now OK for you. I changed Peñarroya-Pueblonuevo-Oeste and Salcedo. The other places were already dotted
Thanks for your effort, Burdie! Unfortunately the other dots are still wrong. They are dotted, but they are dotted in the wrong dot. And the same is true for the two French dots.
I can't see where a dot begins or ends, But if I compare for example the Piedras Blancas dot are:
EBT - Google map is 209 meter diverend
EBT - Wikipedia is 137 meter diverend
EBT - your coordinates is 264 meter divered

So I leave it where it is

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Fri Apr 08, 2022 6:24 pm
by siriusLT
Missing dots:

:flag-lt: Molainiai - Lithuania, Panevėžys county. 55,70841, 24,31351
https://lt.eurobilltracker.com/notes/?id=218567593

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Fri Apr 08, 2022 8:39 pm
by gergapsek
Done.
siriusLT wrote: Fri Apr 08, 2022 6:24 pm Missing dots:

:flag-lt: Molainiai - Lithuania, Panevėžys county. 55,70841, 24,31351
https://lt.eurobilltracker.com/notes/?id=218567593

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2022 7:47 pm
by maarsy
this one is from a while ago , had noticed it but never got around to request a fix

https://en.eurobilltracker.com/notes/?id=154950976

the location is upminster , however if you follow the link of the location it goes to london ( london city rather than greater london )


upminster should be a part of romford under this location as it falls under the RM post code rather than the central london ones https://en.eurobilltracker.com/profile/?city=222873

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2022 1:37 pm
by Burdie
maarsy wrote: Tue Apr 12, 2022 7:47 pm this one is from a while ago , had noticed it but never got around to request a fix

https://en.eurobilltracker.com/notes/?id=154950976

the location is upminster , however if you follow the link of the location it goes to london ( london city rather than greater london )


upminster should be a part of romford under this location as it falls under the RM post code rather than the central london ones https://en.eurobilltracker.com/profile/?city=222873
Upminster has now his own Cityprofile

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2022 7:57 am
by ErGo
Please support coordinates to :flag-hu: Királyszentistván:
47.1092, 18.04386

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2022 3:45 pm
by gergapsek
Done.
ErGo wrote: Tue Apr 26, 2022 7:57 am Please support coordinates to :flag-hu: Királyszentistván:
47.1092, 18.04386

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Sun May 01, 2022 8:53 pm
by Xerxes84
Is is possible to get a dot added for Gortnahoe, Co. Tipperary in Ireland? No notes were entered there previously.

Gortnahoe: 52.6757° N, 7.6028° W

Link to note: https://en.eurobilltracker.com/notes/?id=219362735

Thanks

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Sun May 01, 2022 10:28 pm
by Burdie
Xerxes84 wrote: Sun May 01, 2022 8:53 pm Is is possible to get a dot added for Gortnahoe, Co. Tipperary in Ireland? No notes were entered there previously.

Gortnahoe: 52.6757° N, 7.6028° W

Link to note: https://en.eurobilltracker.com/notes/?id=219362735

Thanks
Done

Re: Incorrect dots and inaccuracies among city profiles

Posted: Wed May 11, 2022 9:22 am
by -flop-
The profile of Sarral should be split so that the italian village could be correctly located in Aosta province (45.6634, 7.1608).
Thank you.