Landmark Wiki for MI

Moderators: SkiDooGuy, GizmoGuy411

Re: Landmark Wiki for MI

Postby Boiler_81 » Mon Dec 30, 2013 9:29 pm

The national proposal (based on the Connecticut guidelines) for landmarks is no being followed in MI https://www.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=129&t=38934 I have been deleting landmarks which do not meet the guideline with the exception of bodies of water and Religious Sites (most don't meet the criteria of "Major"). Going forward, I am going to start following the National Guidelines and delete religious sights and bodies of water unless there is a separate MI guidance/consensus to the contrary.
Boiler_81
Beta tester
Beta tester
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 6:27 pm
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: Landmark Wiki for MI

Postby Boiler_81 » Tue Dec 31, 2013 2:27 am

I also have issue with the much of the water. In many areas of MI lakes provide a point of reference. Without the names, the value is much diminished. I have run across some areas where every mud hole is mapped. I have eliminated the mud holes and left the larger named bodies of water. I think I am going to continue with this method. I am not going to add any water nor am I going to complain if someone deletes it.

I really don't have issue with the national guidelines on religious sites. I think I may delete them as I come across them.
Boiler_81
Beta tester
Beta tester
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 6:27 pm
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: Landmark Wiki for MI

Postby davielde » Wed Jan 15, 2014 5:41 am

Boiler_81 wrote:In many areas of MI lakes provide a point of reference. Without the names, the value is much diminished.

I also think that it is beneficial to have lakes labeled with the name. It's not a priority right now for me to add lakes, but if they make this DNR list, it's probably worth adding them in the future for the label, or keeping them if they already exist.

As for the mud holes and mill ponds, I always try to appreciate the time and effort that some editor has put in making sure that every geo node matches up exactly with the shoreline during the half second that it takes to delete it. In that regard, some bodies of water are works of art.
Image
CM: USA
SM: Michigan, Vermont
AM: Ann Arbor, MI & Thunder Bay, ON
WME Michigan
davielde
Country Manager
Country Manager
 
Posts: 1217
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:01 pm
Location: Michigan, USA
Has thanked: 466 times
Been thanked: 749 times

Re: Landmark Wiki for MI

Postby davielde » Fri Mar 28, 2014 1:25 am

In case there is a very small chance that newer editors see this thread prior to learning about "Places", all guidance is available on the wiki here at the national level. Due to the benefits of standardizing nationally as well as the numerous new categories, I believe that any separate discussion at the state level is moot at this point.
Image
CM: USA
SM: Michigan, Vermont
AM: Ann Arbor, MI & Thunder Bay, ON
WME Michigan
davielde
Country Manager
Country Manager
 
Posts: 1217
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:01 pm
Location: Michigan, USA
Has thanked: 466 times
Been thanked: 749 times

Re: Landmark Wiki for MI

Postby jdeyoung » Wed Jan 15, 2014 2:06 pm

First, there is coverage of mapping water landmarks here:
https://www.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=47438&p=429312&hilit=mapping+water#p426017
I admire the time people take to map lakes to the shoreline, but that actual process is inconsequential, since most lakes of any size are already displayed on the client - albeit without a name. If people are really interested in seeing a name for a lake - a simple (large enough) rectangle with the name may actually suffice. As I understood from the thread cited, there ARE names in the water layer, they're just not now currently displayed.
Image
AM Chicago, NW Indiana, SW Lower MI
jdeyoung
State Manager
State Manager
 
Posts: 301
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 10:04 pm
Location: Greater Chicago Metro area, NW Indiana, SW Lower MI, USA
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 107 times

Re: Landmark Wiki for MI

Postby keeegs » Wed Aug 28, 2013 1:17 am

Seems like a good idea to me.

I think we also need to decide on the use of Parking Lots for. IMO if they're a public pay lot they should be landmarked.
Image
West Michigan Area Manager
Moto X 4.4.4 - Vzw
keeegs
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2012 11:13 pm
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: Landmark Wiki for MI

Postby lelehman » Wed Jan 15, 2014 5:56 am

I'm also down for keeping (and eventually possibly adding) lakes. I was driving near Greenville the other day, and someone has taken quite a lot of time to add in most of the lakes around there.

I tried to fight it, but it was regrettably enjoyable.
ImageImageImage
Rank 5
Mid-Michigan/Tri-Cities Area Manager, Metro Detroit UR Housekeeper
Ithaca, Michigan
Michigan subforum, Michigan wiki
lelehman
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2013 7:25 pm
Location: Ithaca, MI
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: Landmark Wiki for MI

Postby mapcat » Fri Aug 30, 2013 1:01 pm

robc007 wrote:I have to say, in my experience so far, the park and ride lots don't seem to do anything useful on the map.

Eventually some (maybe all?) landmarks will be searchable, so it would be helpful to include park & ride lots to assist with the app's primary goal of assisting commuters.
CM, USA/Canada ∙ iPhone 5 ∙ iOS 7.1
mapcat
 
Posts: 2444
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 5:29 am
Has thanked: 95 times
Been thanked: 196 times

Landmark Wiki for MI

Postby Riamus » Mon Aug 26, 2013 6:06 pm

-- edited --

NOTE: State landmark guidance has been superseded by the national guidance for the new Places system. Please familarize yourself with that guidance and edit the map accordingly.

-- 28 March 2014 --



I'd like to suggest that we set up a Wiki for landmarks similar to what Connecticut has. It is basically the same as what we tell people, but it provides far more detail over what is or isn't allowed and how to mark things than any of the national landmark articles. I'd like to see if there needs to be any discussion over what is on the Connecticut page. Does anyone disagree with anything on that page with regards to mapping the items in MI? Or is it correct as-is? After discussion, we can get a page set up with the information and then I think it would be valuable to have a link to that page stickied (and perhaps other important MI pages that we may create or that are already created).

One quick note regarding the page is that the information on gas station landmarks isn't correct. They don't suppress traffic problems at this time. The same for parking lot landmarks. Also, I think I've seen more consensus to naming the station based on the most prominent signage rather than the brand. They mention both methods on their Wiki page and it isn't perhaps as clear as it should be. But that could be discussed as needed. And I think any public parking (paid or not) that is not tied to an individual business (or mall) should get landmarked. CT says only free ones get landmarked. Ones tied to a business shouldn't be landmarked, of course.

Any thoughts or opinions?

As a side note, I'm also suggesting this for North Carolina as these are the two areas I'm most interested in.
Last edited by sketch on Fri Mar 28, 2014 7:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Places
ImageImage
Area Manager: Michigan - Northern LP.
Waze running on Samsung Galaxy S3.
Riamus
 
Posts: 1043
Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 7:34 pm
Location: Summerfield, NC
Has thanked: 66 times
Been thanked: 228 times

Re: Landmark Wiki for MI

Postby Riamus » Mon Aug 26, 2013 7:15 pm

Yeah, same idea. I just linked the Wiki page as it would give us a good starting point to create our own Wiki page. There are differences as you mentioned and I've included a few issues as well in my post. I think there is leeway to adjust some things to best benefit each state individually as needed. For example, CT notes that there are no toll roads in the state. That is helpful information that varies from other states. It requires some consideration and discussion to have different rules, which is why I wanted to bring it up. Topics aren't always kept up-to-date and as someone pointed out to me here, it's better to link to a Wiki than to the forum because each thread won't likely be updated once it's old, but the Wiki should be. The current USA Landmark Wiki isn't filled in at all yet and would give guidelines for the entire country, which although good as a general guide isn't necessarily perfect for all states. Anyhow, if it isn't thought to be a good option, then we can drop it. I just thought I would suggest it. CT has made some nice Wiki pages and doing similar for Michigan can only benefit our editors as well. More than likely, the CT page was based on the USA thread with whatever differences they felt were needed in CT.
ImageImage
Area Manager: Michigan - Northern LP.
Waze running on Samsung Galaxy S3.
Riamus
 
Posts: 1043
Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 7:34 pm
Location: Summerfield, NC
Has thanked: 66 times
Been thanked: 228 times

Next

Return to Michigan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users