Category talk:UK Mapping priority

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Discuss Category:UK Mapping priority here:

Why Nottingham?

Can't see why Nottingham is on here. City Centre and most areas within the city are reasonably mapped, albeit lacking names. Scores about the same as Sheffield and Manchester, and better than Leeds and Newcastle on SteveC's S/s (although erroneous low population helps here: should be around 270,000). SK53 18:44, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

yup. Looks like a mistake [1].Nottingham doesn't score highly on User:Steve8's metric (UK Mapping Priorities) . Maybe confused with Northampton? This category could contain cities which people just vaguely reckon need more mapping work (and priority) but I don't see why. Better to apply the same metric, add a new city only if it scores highly compared to the others. -- Harry Wood 10:02, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
agree. I think it was meant to be Northampton. Cheers Harry. SK53 14:38, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Distorted by too many Staffs entries

There are far too many entries for Staffordshire in this category: including some which are small villages. I suggest the following be removed: Biddulph, Cold Meece, Eccleshall, Fazeley, Hednesford, Kidsgrove, Penkridge, Rugeley, Stone, Uttoxeter and Yarnfield. I also doubt if the districts are appropriate candidates, and I suspect Leek and Lichfield are too small. I also notice a few smaller places in Sussex have crept in. I thought the original threshold was a population of 50,000. SK53 21:48, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes. I've clarified on the category page here now, that only cities listed and scored on the UK Mapping Priorities page should be included in this category. It's not just a category for people to add their idea of what is a priority. Villages should be removed (they should not be listed on the UK Mapping Priorities page since the comparison metric wont work properly, and there's too many of them) -- Harry Wood 11:08, 7 July 2009 (UTC)