Alert to bad coordinates

[+DougK]

I don't want to be too negative here, but I think category officer need to do a better job of checking that a waymark is at the specified coordinates. This can be done with either maps or street view, to make sure the object is at least near the bubble on the map.

 

To me, coordinates and photos, along with research, are the essence of Waymarking. If the coordinates are off, problems arise when people attempt a visit or the waymark gets filed by someone else later with the correct coordinates. I believe the proper response to this situation has been mentioned that the one with correct coordinates, even if later, should be accepted and the one with incorrect coordinates reviewed and declined, because it is inaccurate.

 

I bring this up because I've been working offline with sbcamper, trying to figure out why 75% of his waymarks are a quarter mile off. First, he says he's taking coordinates where he takes the picture, and he often is using a telephoto lens. But he still ends up with coordinates that are 0.2-0.3 miles away and not even in a line of sight view of the waymark. Something else is wrong. At least 4 of 5, that were approved today are wrong. (Dog park on a golf course, burger king at a residence, petrosomatoglyph in a lake…)

 

In particular, officers reviewing waymarks from the California-Oregon area for this waymarker, should pay a little more attention. Declining and asking for better coordinates is doing a favor to Waymarking in general and particularly this waymarker.

Edited May 6, 2012 by DougK

[+silverquill]

I do understand what you are saying. And, I've been glad several times when reviewers have caught my errors in coordinates. Sometimes it's obvious - the coords are in the ocean or some other strange location. I'll admit that most of the time a quick eyeball is all most waymarks will get unless there is red flag somewhere. For many types of waymarks there just is no way to tell how accurate the coordinates are.

 

Another difficulty is that the Google maps that we get are many years out of date! The building I've been living in for three years is not on the map! So, if I waymark it, some review might reject it because the coordinates are nowhere near the building.

 

The problem I see the most, aside from the obvious typo, etc., are coordinates that are recorded from where the photo is taken, or from some other viewpoint. Again, it is difficult to determine this many times. A waymark for a building should be at the entrance, NOT from across the street or out in the parking lot! Same for a sculpture, a statue, or almost anything else. The principle is that the coordinates are for the actual object/site itself. There are all sorts of extenuating circumstances, but that is the underlying standard, as far as I'm concerned. Some have different opinions, but I think the arguments are weak.

 

Another issue with coordinates is Waymarking something that covers a wide area like a historic district, a park, a beach, etc. In some of my categories I even have a variable that asks for the exact location at which the coordinates are taken. But, in these kinds of situations, it is a good idea to specify this in one's description. I'll often ask for this information, if it is not clear, when I review a waymark.

 

And, just so you know, I've also worked with the individual you mentioned about the same problem, but he is still a mystery to me, and he still can't get it right. So, if I review a waymark from him, I always check the coordinates.

 

Thanks for the reminder for something all reviewers should keep in mind!

[GT.US]

Consistent Bad coords would tell me the may have their GPS set with the wrong DATUM. I don't have the GPOS in front of me, but I think you go to UNITS and there is a selection for the DATUM. SOmone who has a GPS handy might expound on this.

[+Max and 99]

I once had a reviewer politely ask about my coords, since according to the map they didn't look like they were in the park. BUT, I had stood in the park, with a handheld gps to obtain the coords, and knew they were right. I think the map wasn't reflecting exactly where the park boundaries were.

 

Once, I had a reviewer change my coords to what he thought was more accurate, even though he was not the one using a handheld gps at the site. Not good, but it was a lesson learned, so that's OK. Tread lightly if you need to go in that direction!

 

Most of my waymarks these days are headstones, and you have to be VERY accurate with those coordinates!

[+BruceS]

 

Most of my waymarks these days are headstones, and you have to be VERY accurate with those coordinates!

 

As I review a lot of these I can not really tell how accurate they are but I do check to see that they are in the cemetery and not a tenth of a mile or more away from the cemetery in a shopping center parking lot. Of course with many of yours all I have to do is see that they they show as zero miles from the others in the same cemetery.

 

The advantage of reviewing mostly historic categories the locations show on the satellite view and street view as they were not built since the last update... they were there before there were satellites in most cases.

Edited May 10, 2012 by BruceS

[+silverquill]

I once had a reviewer politely ask about my coords, since according to the map they didn't look like they were in the park. BUT, I had stood in the park, with a handheld gps to obtain the coords, and knew they were right. I think the map wasn't reflecting exactly where the park boundaries were.

 

Once, I had a reviewer change my coords to what he thought was more accurate, even though he was not the one using a handheld gps at the site. Not good, but it was a lesson learned, so that's OK. Tread lightly if you need to go in that direction!

 

Most of my waymarks these days are headstones, and you have to be VERY accurate with those coordinates!

 

The Google maps we get are very, very out of date! The building I've lived in for three years does not show up. I recently waymarked a museum, and if a reviewer checks the map the coordinates are in the middle of a field! So, I use the satellite views with discretion, keeping in mind the type of waymark. Just reviewed a former school, though, and the coordinates were a block away.

 

If I'm fairly certain that coordinates are incorrect, I will decline and ask for a correction. If I have some doubt, I may either accept or decline and just ask the waymarker to check or verify. Sometimes the problem is that the coordinates were taken from the car or from a viewpoint rather than at the actual site. In my opinion, if a person does not have a hand-held GPS, or can't bother to walk to the front entrance, or next to the object, or whatever, then this is the wrong hobby to do.

 

What I NEVER do is try to correct someone else's coordinates! Even if it looks like an obvious typo or a hemisphere reversal (still plagues us). I just can't tell from my desk what it is actually like in the field. And, with some things, like headstones, it is almost impossible to judge accuracy when reviewing, except in a general way. At some point we have to rely on the person on the spot.

[+Outspoken1]

As a Leader/Officer in many categories, I almost always (can't say 'always' because sometimes I am sleepy - I review Waymarks first thing in the morning!!) I look to see if the town or general area looks 'OK.' Can't say I always magnify the map since 'most' of the time the coordinates seem accurate and I am reviewing many Waymarks each day. There is a time constraint before I have to go to work (I review while eating breakfast - it is a great way to start the day!). A 'red flag' is usually a blue map which means incorrect or incomplete coordinates were used (I've done that one myself several times!). Or for our European/Asian Waymarkers, the default North or West skewed their coordinates.

 

It is good to know of Waymarkers that may need more coaching to become proficient (now, was that Politically Correct?!?!?). While Waymarking is not an expensive hobby (camera, GPSr and Internet connection), it does ask for a modicum of care and responsibility to get accurate coordinates, good photos and have actually tried to create a good Waymark.

 

Take care,

Outspoken1

[+lumbricus]

As a Leader/Officer in many categories, I almost always (can't say 'always' because sometimes I am sleepy - I review Waymarks first thing in the morning!!) I look to see if the town or general area looks 'OK.' Can't say I always magnify the map since 'most' of the time the coordinates seem accurate and I am reviewing many Waymarks each day. There is a time constraint before I have to go to work (I review while eating breakfast - it is a great way to start the day!). A 'red flag' is usually a blue map which means incorrect or incomplete coordinates were used (I've done that one myself several times!). Or for our European/Asian Waymarkers, the default North or West skewed their coordinates...

 

It's funny! My day is beginning exactly like you wrote above

[+Ianatlarge]

I have come across a number of south east Asian waymarks with inaccurate coordinates. I have passed a few on to category officers, but nothing was done. So I suggest a policy of fixing what needs fixing. On a wider scale, and I believe that this has been discussed before, but a manual, a guide book on Waymarking? Written by ourselves. Keep it short and simple, a FAQ approach, including the correct use of the gps, guidelines on descriptions, and instructions for photographs.

 

I never correct another waymarker's waymark. A man should look after his own waymarks. In fact just a few days ago I mistakenly advised someone that there was an error in his wm. He replied with an explanation and correction to my objection. If I had changed his wm problems would have ensued.

 

And certain people's wm habits explain why I rarely get a wm to approve. They are all gone by the time I awaken!

[+Max and 99]

There were two waymarks posted in my state last week (same location, two different categories), with coordinates that were several miles away. I notified the officers in both categories, and the coordinates were fixed (I don't know if the officers corrected them or they asked the waymark poster to do it).

 

But I was about to visit that place anyway, and I'm thinking if I HADN'T notified the officers of the mistake in coords, I could have posted those exact two waymarks (with correct coords) and I'm assuming mine would have been the ones allowed to remain since they were the first ones submitted with correct coords.

 

I'd feel too guilty to actually go through with it, but I have mulled the possibility.

[+silverquill]

IF one has the correct coordinates, then one can use the "Edit" feature to do the corrections. These are reviewed by an officer before being changed. Otherwise, all one can do is either (1) write the waymark creator (sometimes fruitless effort (2) write the group leader or other active officer pointing out the error and suggesting that the waymark be reconsidered.

[+DougK]

I don't want to be too negative here, but I think category officer need to do a better job of checking that a waymark is at the specified coordinates. This can be done with either maps or street view, to make sure the object is at least near the bubble on the map.

 

Here's an example of a waymark approved yesterday:

WMHJ4D - VFW Post 9650

 

Starting with the coordinates, I zoom in and see the roof of this building and notice the nice round swimming pool in the back yard. Hmmm…

 

I click the Google Maps link at the bottom of the waymark and then enter Street View. I spin around "virtually" and don't see anything that looks like the supplied pictures. Hmmm…

 

I notice that an address of the VFW post was included, so I open a new Google Maps window and paste in the address and search. Now I'm at a different location on the map than the posted coordinates took me. Another Hmmm…

 

I go into Street View, do the spin around again and now the pictures match the location of this address.

 

With a little further calculation, I determine that the coordinates are off by 4.6 miles! If this were a geocache, how would you ever find it? and

 

Would anyone like to see more examples like this?

Edited July 16, 2013 by DougK

[+DougK]

But I was about to visit that place anyway, and I'm thinking if I HADN'T notified the officers of the mistake in coords, I could have posted those exact two waymarks (with correct coords) and I'm assuming mine would have been the ones allowed to remain since they were the first ones submitted with correct coords.

 

I'd feel too guilty to actually go through with it, but I have mulled the possibility.

 

OK, so I've mulled over this possibility too and based on previous opinions expressed in these forums, that's what should happen. I decided to verify your assumption. Here's another example of an off base waymark, approved Jun 23, 2013:

Cemetry - IORM - Jacksonville OR

 

One of the first things I always do when I start looking at a waymark is go to the satellite view. I clicked "+" a few times in the miniature Google map and switched to satellite view. Strange! this looks like a residential area rather than a cemetery.

 

So I sent the following note to the approver, on Jun 25, 2013:

 

DougK says,

Re: WMHCF6 - Cemetry (sic) - IORM - Jacksonville OR

Hmmm… Why doesn't it looks like a "Cemetry" in Google Maps at these coordinates, but instead, a residential area? Because Jacksonville, Oregon is on the other side of Medford! Really bad Coordinates. Happens a lot with this person. Yours to mull over or re-evaluate.

Doug

 

A week went by and the waymark was unchanged.

 

So I sent the following note to the poster, on July 2, 2013:

 

DougK says,

Re: WMHCF6 - Cemetry (sic) - IORM - Jacksonville OR

Here's another waymark with coordinates off by over 6 miles. No one will be able to find this cemetery from these coordinates. The coordinates are in Medford, OR and Jacksonville is on the other side of I-5. Also Cemetery is spelled incorrectly in the title. Can you fix these?

Doug

 

Still nothing changed. Well, as things turned out, a week later I happened to have planned a driving trip from Washington state down the coast of Oregon and back to California. The lack of action on this waymark, and its value to my grid, made me drive two hours out of the way to go visit the cemetery and waymark it in the correct location. On July 11, 2013, I posted:

Red Men Section of Cemetery - Jacksonville, OR

Now, perhaps my mistake was including a private message to the reviewers, stating that this new waymark should invalidate the old waymark, since the coordinates were 6.8 miles off. Next thing I see, the waymark is in group vote! Hmmm…

 

Perhaps I should have been more subtle and submitted it without the private message, since the invalid one wouldn't have triggered the proximity detection alert, and see if it just got approved. Then after approval, suggest again that the first one be re-evaluated. Still waiting to see what happens.

[+TheBeanTeam]

Now, perhaps my mistake was including a private message to the reviewers, stating that this new waymark should invalidate the old waymark, since the coordinates were 6.8 miles off. Next thing I see, the waymark is in group vote! Hmmm…

 

Perhaps I should have been more subtle and submitted it without the private message, since the invalid one wouldn't have triggered the proximity detection alert, and see if it just got approved. Then after approval, suggest again that the first one be re-evaluated. Still waiting to see what happens.

 

And it appears the vote wound up in limbo even though it was approved over a month ago. I think I just released it and the waymark that was not in the proper location has been re-evaluated and declined.

[+linkys]

I have encountered the same waymarker in my travels north through California, waymarks with co-ordinates off by miles, co-ordinates correct but the wrong city, etc. Made me go back to re-evaluate a waymark of of his I had previously approved. Obviously I had been in a hurry because it didn't meet the category requirements. Nobody is perfect, but still...

[+jhuoni]

I want to say a few things about this:

 

I have submitted a few waymarks recently, and when I save them, my coords are different from what I entered. Not by much, but some were a mile or two. I get my data live, from the site on a Garmin Etrex - I normally average about 10 to 50 times. I use DEG MIN, so I have to change the settings before I enter my coords. Of 26 WM's submitted, I have only had ONE rejected for bad coords, and it was obvious - it was in another state. I learned to double check the location every time.

 

When I search for a nearby town using GC.com's map, it puts the center of that town about 15 miles from where it is.

 

Just thought I'd share...

 

John

 

Just a few minutes ago, I was entering a WM. I put in 34 11.393 082 9.642, and it put my wm in the middle of nowhere. I am guessing in the middle of the ocean. When I added the ZERO before the nine (09.642) it corrected it self. Things that make you go Hmmmm.

Edited August 2, 2013 by jhuoni

[GT.US]

IF one has the correct coordinates, then one can use the "Edit" feature to do the corrections. These are reviewed by an officer before being changed. Otherwise, all one can do is either (1) write the waymark creator (sometimes fruitless effort (2) write the group leader or other active officer pointing out the error and suggesting that the waymark be reconsidered.

 

The Edit feature is really the best way to address this. It's a pretty stable process. I usually look at the map when reviewing, but not to the detail of trying to figure if the building is the right one.

[+MountainWoods]

If you DO use Edit to suggest edits to someone else's waymark, do you ever get a message indicating that the action was taken or rejected?

 

I know of a couple of situations where I did an Edit to add - GONE to a waymark name, but I don't know if it was ever done, 'cause I can't remember which waymarks they are (I've visited almost 1,000 so far).

 

I've also done some other Edits for other things, such as the fact that the post office in my town moved about 1/4 mile away into a different building.

[+fi67]

Edit feedback is unpredictable and completely random.

 

Until now I received one message that one of my waymarks was edited and the edit was accepted, I have no idea how many edits have happened in all.

 

From the other side: I have done a lot of edits. Obvious things, wrong coordinates (often hemisphere bugs), missing regions and the like; for about one out of twenty there was a feedback mail, the others were accepted without any notice.

 

An officer does not have any information who did the edit, there is no chance for questions to clarify problems, and usually some variables are marked as edited that have not bben touched at all.

 

The whole procedure is very buggy, but at least officers receive the edits as far as I can see.