# Does reviewing a campsite have to be so tedious?



## Phil42

I would leave a lot more if it wasn't so long-winded. I find that much of the info asked for is on the campsite's website (and proper campsites these days usually have a website). The most annoying bit is when you get to the co-ordinates. Again, many campsites tell you their co-ordinates on their web-site but there doesn't seem to be a way of entering this so you have to go through the clicking on a map nonsense. I've just done one and even when I tried postcode and address, I couldn't find the town, never mind the site!

I planned to review a number f decent sites we've stayed in this summer but, I'm sorry, life's too short. No wonder the campsite database is often no help at all when looking for sites.

Phil


----------



## JohnGun

totally agree, numerous times i have started to insert data for recently visited sites into the campsite database, and thought the same, so i didnt bother.

surely there must be a more straight forward system??


----------



## jimmyd0g

I agree totally, Phil. We we came back from our biggish trip last week I had info on six different sites - not all of which are already on the database. However, like you, I haven't got the info to provide a lot of what is requested. Something that was pointed out to me though is that if a site is already on the database & you simply want to add a further review you click a box in (I think) the top right corner - in that case you just write a script review.


----------



## bognormike

so how do you suggest the location is entered? :?:


----------



## emjaiuk

I gave up at Easter. I thought it was me doing something wrong since people are kind enough to post reviews.

Malcolm


----------



## Smart-Tow

Well, I decided to do a few while I was away this summer because I think it is important to give something back to the pastime that gives me so much pleasure.

Yes, I guess the App has some development problems - certainly on my iPad, not sure how to update it (Dave?). So I used my main windows computer via WiFi. It worked very well and clicking on the Google map and zooming in until I found the site location seemed to be the best way to do it.

I would like the option to show if a site is Tow Car Friendly.

It is a great resource and it will not get better unless we all use and update it. Top marks to the Team for making the platform available.


----------



## woodhus

The only bit I find tedious is the last bit, finding the correct spot on the map to enter the location. It would be helpful to have the option of entering the co-ordinates directly in Lat-Long decimal or deg format.


----------



## madontour

I too would appreciate the ability to enter the gps coordinates by typing them in (trying to use the Google map on my smartphone has stopped being a good game) 

Perhaps the ability to 'list' a site with the minimum of info could be introduced alongside the 'reviews'. A potential user of a site could do their own research once they've found a site in their chosen area.

M


----------



## hogan

I have only ever done 1 never again it needs someone a lot cleverer then me to alter the input form and simplify it.


----------



## Phil42

bognormike said:


> so how do you suggest the location is entered? :?:


As I said, when the campsite website provides its co-ordinates, why can't the reviewer enter them directly?


----------



## bognormike

Phil42 said:
 

> bognormike said:
> 
> 
> 
> so how do you suggest the location is entered? :?:
> 
> 
> 
> As I said, when the campsite website provides its co-ordinates, why can't the reviewer enter them directly?
Click to expand...

not sure, Phil, but aren't there different ways of entering co-ordinates, so it may become confusing? 
I have always used the map to locate them - roughly to start with, then closing in until you get the exact location.

The whole point of it is that you can drill down on the map and locate a site, so pinpointing where you think it is on the map would seem to be most accurate? And don't forget that Gaspode & Spykal spend alot of time checking out the entries made, and editing as required.

my procedure when getting back home is to go through my written log, where I keep the site details and prices, conditions of the sute etc, then check to see whether the site is in the database. If it is, I do a review / update, if it isn't I go through the details and post the new one up.


----------



## jimmyd0g

bognormike said:


> Phil42 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bognormike said:
> 
> 
> 
> so how do you suggest the location is entered? :?:
> 
> 
> 
> As I said, when the campsite website provides its co-ordinates, why can't the reviewer enter them directly?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> not sure, Phil, but aren't there different ways of entering co-ordinates, so it may become confusing?
> I have always used the map to locate them - roughly to start with, then closing in until you get the exact location.
> 
> The whole point of it is that you can drill down on the map and locate a site, so pinpointing where you think it is on the map would seem to be most accurate? And don't forget that Gaspode & Spykal spend alot of time checking out the entries made, and editing as required.
> 
> my procedure when getting back home is to go through my written log, where I keep the site details and prices, conditions of the sute etc, then check to see whether the site is in the database. If it is, I do a review / update, if it isn't I go through the details and post the new one up.
Click to expand...

Sorry Mike, but does this whole reply of yours prove the very point that Phil is trying to make? I'm not unintelligent, but your 'simple' method of putting co-ordinates on has put me off ever putting on a new review. Which leads to the next question, why do co-ordinates _have_ to go on a campsite review? Whatever happened to good old postal address & postcode?


----------



## Cherekee

I agree it can be tedious, but please do not go down the way of inputting GPS data that you have found. The number of times I have been to site co-ordinates or pushpins by others and the site is 1/2 mile away. It just needs a slight slip of a digit and its worthless (unless you are really sure it is correct then check and then recheck). By far the better way is to narrow down on the map and pinpoint it there. I am going to a CL on Wednesday in Dorset from co-ordinates from the Caravan Club website, even they are incorrect. I had to find the site on Google Streets.I have done lots of reviews and it is not "that" bad.

Alan


----------



## GEMMY

Jimmy, you try putting a French address in tom tom 50% aren't recognised, and as for a post code, that means somewhere in a 50 mile radius 8O 

tony


----------



## bognormike

jimmyd0g said:


> bognormike said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phil42 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bognormike said:
> 
> 
> 
> so how do you suggest the location is entered? :?:
> 
> 
> 
> As I said, when the campsite website provides its co-ordinates, why can't the reviewer enter them directly?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> not sure, Phil, but aren't there different ways of entering co-ordinates, so it may become confusing?
> I have always used the map to locate them - roughly to start with, then closing in until you get the exact location.
> 
> The whole point of it is that you can drill down on the map and locate a site, so pinpointing where you think it is on the map would seem to be most accurate? And don't forget that Gaspode & Spykal spend alot of time checking out the entries made, and editing as required.
> 
> my procedure when getting back home is to go through my written log, where I keep the site details and prices, conditions of the sute etc, then check to see whether the site is in the database. If it is, I do a review / update, if it isn't I go through the details and post the new one up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry Mike, but does this whole reply of yours prove the very point that Phil is trying to make? I'm not unintelligent, but your 'simple' method of putting co-ordinates on has put me off ever putting on a new review. Which leads to the next question, why do co-ordinates _have_ to go on a campsite review? Whatever happened to good old postal address & postcode?
Click to expand...

all very well for formal locations in the Uk (although post codes can cover quite a big area?) and official sites, but what about an aire somewhere in ruural France, or a wild spot in Scotland? You can'tjust go on an address when you possibly dont know it exactly, and the french postcodes are not easily found without a site address. 
In the viilage of St Margaret de Thatcher in Brittany, 100m down from the local Boulangerie........without co-ordinates, it would be impossible to locate accurately.


----------



## peedee

When you say its is difficult locating a site in map view have you got it on the satellite view? 

I cannpot see what is difficult about ticking a few boxes?

peedee


----------



## Phil42

I'd be interested to know how many members use co-ordinates to find sites. I don't, because my SatNav used addresses and postcodes.

Phil


----------



## jimmyd0g

Mike, Tony & others,

Are you saying that you _only_ visit sites, aires, etc where you have the GPS co-ordinates? Whatever happened to using good old fashioned map-reading skills along with (when in the vicinity of the site) asking the locals?
Anyway, personally I think that this is a bit of a diversion from the point of the original post. Why can't partial details be entered for a new review & if, at a later date, another member establishes the GPS co-ordinates, or whether the site is open all year then that info can be added at that time.


----------



## peedee

Co-ordinates are more accurate. In rural areas postcodes can cover a very wide area!

peedee


----------



## tonyt

Phil42 said:


> I'd be interested to know how many members use co-ordinates to find sites. I don't, because my SatNav used addresses and postcodes.
> 
> Phil


How about a separate thread then, asking just that question?

I suspect that the majority of people using the database have sat navs and the majority of those would use co-ords.

But I may be wrong. 

Post Codes and addresses can be so vague.


----------



## Phil42

Cherekee said:


> I agree it can be tedious, but please do not go down the way of inputting GPS data that you have found.
> Alan


But I don't think it's possible to do this - that's my point. If you'd 'found' it on the campsite website, I think you could reasonably assume they'd got it right, just as you would with their own address.

Phil


----------



## Phil42

tonyt said:


> Phil42 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Post Codes and addresses can be so vague.
> 
> 
> 
> I'd be interested to know how addresses can be vague? Or do are you saying, like another poster, that your SatNav doesn't have an accurate database of streets and numbers?
> 
> Phil
Click to expand...


----------



## emjaiuk

Phil42 said:


> tonyt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phil42 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Post Codes and addresses can be so vague.
> 
> 
> 
> I'd be interested to know how addresses can be vague? Or do are you saying, like another poster, that your SatNav doesn't have an accurate database of streets and numbers?
> 
> Phil
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'd be interested in one that does!  I use TomTom all the time in my job, both in the UK and Europe, and whilst I couldn't do without it, there is no way you could say it was 100% accurate all the time, particually with French road names.
> 
> Malcolm
Click to expand...


----------



## Zebedee

Phil42 said:


> I'd be interested to know how addresses can be vague? Or do are you saying, like another poster, that your SatNav doesn't have an accurate database of streets and numbers?
> Phil


Try looking up Camping Tourony.

http://www.camping-tourony.com/en/index.htm

The address is Route de Poul Palud . . . which stretches for miles. 8O

The postcode, or what passes for one :roll: is 22730 Trégastel, and it drops the pointer on Google Maps nowhere near where the campsite is. 8O

It doesn't matter how accurate the satnav database is if the camp website doesn't provide enough information, or it's so vague as to be almost useless. :roll:

Dave


----------



## tonyt

Phil42 said:


> I'd be interested to know how addresses can be vague? Or do are you saying, like another poster, that your SatNav doesn't have an accurate database of streets and numbers?Phil


Post Codes can cover huge areas and, if you plot purely by the Post Code, a sat nav will generally take you to the centre of that code.

Street addresses can be difficult to locate.

Personally, I like co-ords as they take me to a precise point.

I do however agree that it would be better if we could revise the original review as and when more details become available, or change but I suspect that would take considerable re-programming.

Whatever format is used to load and maintain the database it must be simple or it won't get used and the database will become more and more out of date and therefore of no use at all.


----------



## carol

I check whe. I arrive if it is in database, assuming I hadn't found it there in the first plce

I then when going through, tick the box, use this location, which is obviously our parked location within the Aire, as we don't use sites

It does say do you want to use this location. Occasionally of course there is no mobile signal, so I have to wait to upload as and when I can, which can give me a few

What used to annoy was filling it all in, and then finding I got an email to say it was already in the database, so why couldn't I find it?

Then you couldn't do a review by iPad or iPhone, but I am assured it can now, so I will see, that is ok as long as I don't have to input all the original info, as I wonr bother. Life is too short

Carol


----------



## Phil42

As it happens, the campsite I was trying to review is very easy to find as it's the only campsite in town and very well-signed, as a significant number of campsites are. Some of my favourite campsites have been found in this way. So no-one, except the incurably co-ordinate dependent, would actually need co-ordinates. 

The fact that some campsites give an incomplete address doesn't detract form my main point that you shouldn't have to submit co-ordinates in order to review ANY campsite, particularly as someone has already posted that it is easy to get them wrong. Let members who want to share info about a very good (or very bad) campsite get on with that. Then those who enjoy games can do the rest. 

Phil


----------



## Cherekee

I do not use a GPS as I use a map but I do (if I can) a bit of research before visiting a CL/Aire etc and very often in conjunction with Google Streets find that the co-ordenates given are not in the same place as the site. The one I am going to on Wednesday is next to the car showroom so I will know when to turn in. If I had gone by someones inaccurate input I would be in somebodies front garden by mistake.

I do have Autoroute and sometimes they are incorrect too.

Alan


----------



## erneboy

This is not a new discussion.

It seems that we are not permitted to use co-ordinates because quite a few of us are unable to do so accurately.

I too dislike the tedium of having to trawl through a map of Europe to pin point a site for which I have co-ordinates. I think I have been told, having raised this point before, that there is a way to locate the site you are adding by using co-ordinates but if there is I have not found it.

As a result of finding the experience of entering a site very time consuming I only put them in if they are important due to a scarcity in a particular area. 

In my case I always enter any new aires I find in Spain, other than that I rarely bother, Alan.


----------



## peedee

If we all thought it was so so tedious there would not be a database  
I am at a loss as to why so many find it so difficult to tick a few boxes and pin point a site visited on a map. 

peedee


----------



## Phil42

erneboy said:


> As a result of finding the experience of entering a site very time consuming I only put them in if they are important due to a scarcity in a particular area.


Now this interests me. My understanding is that you can't submit a review without co-ordinates and that these have to be 'found' in the official way (map). Am I wrong?

Phil


----------



## Zebedee

Phil42 said:


> The fact that some campsites give an incomplete address doesn't detract form my main point . . .
> Phil


I wasn't suggesting that it did, or should. :roll:

You said, _"I'd be interested to know how addresses can be vague?"_

I showed you just one example.

Just that and nothing more.

Dave


----------



## Phil42

peedee said:


> If we all thought it was so so tedious there would not be a database
> I am at a loss as to why so many find it so difficult to tick a few boxes and pin point a site visited on a map.
> 
> peedee


The point is that it could be a very much better database, i.e. more information about more campsites, if everybody (including the people who don't enjoy ticking boxes and zooming in on maps) was encouraged to describe their experiences of campsites. Others could add whatever they wanted/thought useful. That's how many review sites work. It's already clear from this thread that people have given up, which means useful information is not being gathered.

Phil


----------



## KeithChesterfield

We hire MHs to go to France and none of them have Satnav systems.

We've never failed to find a site - possibly because we can read a map - and having to give coordinates just to complete a review questionaire seems a waste of my time and effort.

Someone somewhere - please make it easier.


----------



## peedee

Phil,
If you only add the madatory fields surely that cannot be tedious or is it just the co-ords that bother you? They used to be available to enter but very few got it right and it was much easier, at least in my view, to just put the balloon in the right place on the satellite map.

peedee


----------



## JIMY

Ive never reviewed before but will try now
Jim


----------



## JIMY

Job done if rather sketchily from memory of April
I cant really see how it could be made much simpler
Jim


----------



## nukeadmin

> The point is that it could be a very much better database, i.e. more information about more campsites, if everybody (including the people who don't enjoy ticking boxes and zooming in on maps) was encouraged to describe their experiences of campsites. Others could add whatever they wanted/thought useful. That's how many review sites work. It's already clear from this thread that people have given up, which means useful information is not being gathered.


hmmmm i disagree tbh, we have a very accurate database atm, with many painstaking hours spent either by campsite database staff and me trying to remove duplicates and cleanse our existing data, and even more spent by the admin team who approve all entries (after firstly checking the validity of data and gps locations)

If we let partial reviews in then we would end up with a mish mash of inaccurate and accurate reviews, even though we end up with less entries this way at least they are as accurate as we can make them 

As for making it more simple. there are only 6 mandatory fields as follows:-

Score
Campsite Name
Country
Campsite Type
Disabled Facilities Available Yes / No
Town/Village

and then the gps position stage where you locate it on a map

Yes there are a lot of checkboxes and fields, but you only need enter what information you have, the admins will attempt to fill in gaps if they can


----------



## nukeadmin

the biggest input users can give which is only a few moments time and so easy is to add reviews to existing entries

just search for the campsite name, then click the Add Review button on the campsites information page and fill in the few fields

i.e. here is an example

http://www.motorhomefacts.com/modules.php?name=Campsites&op=display_results&csid=1296

click the Add Review button as shown below

then on the next page simply fill in the Month / Year you visited, the Score you want to award it and your review text. Its that simple 

See second image below

Another way of improving the database is adding photos to those entries without any or adding more photos to those entries that do 
as this again improves the quality of the data for other users


----------



## Telbell

> the biggest input users can give which is only a few moments time and so easy is to add reviews to existing entries


Even I can do that-so I can confirm it really is easy! :lol: :lol:


----------



## JohnGun

We are not all retired so haven't time


----------



## peedee

That is a poor excuse. If you can find time to use this site for other purposes then there is time to enter campsite information or reviews.

peedee


----------



## sallytrafic

It would be easier to understand if the initial entry and and subsequent input by others on that entry weren't both called campsite reviews.

I could get Aleksandr Orlov to do a presentation about the difference -simples


----------



## madontour

Following a tip from a previous post I may have a solution for the OP.

Phil wrote _"The most annoying bit is when you get to the co-ordinates. Again, many campsites tell you their co-ordinates on their web-site but there doesn't seem to be a way of entering this so you have to go through the clicking on a map nonsense."_

Once on the map entry page you can enter gps coordinates in the search box - eg 50.12768, 5.18793 - then click <search the map>

This opens the map in the correct place (assuming you've typed the latitude and longitude correctly) and all you have to do is accept the position on the map page.

It wasn't clear to me that lat and long could be used for seaching the map as the page itself suggests searching by address or post code. Now I know, Job done!

Mike


----------



## nukeadmin

I have amended the text at the top of the map phase page to include information about entering gps co-ordinates into the search box


----------



## tonyt

nukeadmin said:


> I have amended the text at the top of the map phase page to include information about entering gps co-ordinates into the search box


When entering co-ords in the search box, a method I haven't used for a while, should the search activate to show, for confimation, where that spot is? Or are the co-ords just accepted?

I just tried it on my last review but the co-ords just sit there and the search button doesn't seem to do anything?

Obviously I can't go back and have another go


----------



## Phil42

Thought I'd try to enter a site from the USB database. No more user-friendly than on here. I'd put in all the information that I know and then got a message requiring me to fill in all the mandatory fields, without as far as I could see, any indication as to what these were.

What do you think I did next? (Apart from leaving my laptop on all night for fear of wasting all that I'd done so far?)

Phil


----------



## nukeadmin

> fill in all the mandatory fields, without as far as I could see, any indication as to what these were


hmmmm it is the ones that are highlighted in red text i.e.

Score
Campsite Name
Campsite Type
Disabled Facilities
Town / Village


----------



## Phil42

O.K., so I don't know if this site has disabled facilities. I searched online and couldn't find the answer. Other people may well have similar problems, abandon the process and never try again. This may be why campsites that haven't found their way onto the MHF database are well represented with helpful reviews on campsite UK and trip advisor, e.g.

Phil


----------



## Chascass

The options for Disabled Facilities on mhf database are Yes / No or Not Known, could not be easier.

Charlie


----------



## barryd

I don't like the map either but if you can now enter the gps to find the spot on the map the fine.

What I did start to di before I left was edit some of the gps positons for the cc site cl's. Many are wrong. This is the fault of the caravan club as they have simply converted the postcodes to gps which as you may know are often up to mile out.

So as someone mentioned reviewing a site is easy so if you have the right gps for a Cl then add it in as well as other info if possible.


----------



## Phil42

No sorry, when trying to enter a campsite on the USB database, I'm only offered Y or N.

Phil


----------



## erneboy

Is there now a facility to put the gps co-ordinates in and move the map to the site. I have a vague recollection of having been told that was possible before but I have not seen it?

I would very much appreciate that facility, Alan.


----------



## Chascass

Alan see the post by Madontour on page 5

Charlie


----------



## tonyt

Chascass said:


> Alan see the post by Madontour on page 5
> 
> Charlie


Have you actually tried that recently?

See my post on the same page - I had a vague recollection of it working some time ago but when I tried it the other day the search button did nothing - but maybe it was just me!

I'd be pleased to hear that it is working.


----------



## Chascass

No I haven't, I assumed Mike (Madontour) had, and Nuke confirmed that's how it should work. 

Charlie


----------



## erneboy

Thanks, I have been told in the past that I could do that (I think) but it didn't work for me then. Maybe it will if I try again in future, Alan.


----------



## tonyt

erneboy said:


> Thanks, I have been told in the past that I could do that (I think) but it didn't work for me then. Maybe it will if I try again in future, Alan.


Well tonight I submitted 2 new reviews and on both I attempted to identify the GPS co-ords by inputting the actual co-ords, eg 45.6174,1.4335, into the search box at stage two of the process. On both occasions nothing happened - no indication that any search was happening.

Can a campsite db mod please tell us if this facility is working, supposed to be working, known to be not working. If it's something I'm doing wrong then please tell me.


----------



## gaspode

Hi Tony

First of all, whatever method you used to enter the coordinates for the two sites you submitted tonight they were spot on correct so something is working. :lol: 

The method of entry of GPS varies depending on what platform you're using, ie; on the USB stick you can enter the GPS directly in any format, from the main site however you need to use the map screen using decimal coord's (xx.xxxx deg) only. I don't know what the iPhone/iPad apps require as I don't own one.

Members used to be able to enter coords directly into the first page of the entry screens but we had so many false positions that Nuke decided to force the use of the map to reduce the number of sites we had to reject - and it worked. We now only reject a very few entries. Unfortunately many members aren't familiar with the various formats of GPS notation and so Nuke decided to keep it simple - select from the map only.

As for searching the map screen, this should indeed work for GPS or postcode searches - but ATM it seems to have a problem. I've just tried a test entry and it just sits there instead of searching. :roll: 

Looks as if Nuke has some de-bugging to do. :roll:


----------



## mandyandandy

Since I found out that it is not just member reviews I have given up adding any more. 

My family will be happy as I use to make them travel miles out of our way to take pic's and get info. 

Got loads from our last holiday so may just stick them in my album. 

I see the silly brown circle still there too, that also drives me potty.  

Mandy


----------



## tonyt

gaspode said:


> Hi Tony
> 
> First of all, whatever method you used to enter the coordinates for the two sites you submitted tonight they were spot on correct so something is working. :lol:
> 
> The method of entry of GPS varies depending on what platform you're using, ie; on the USB stick you can enter the GPS directly in any format, from the main site however you need to use the map screen using decimal coord's (xx.xxxx deg) only. I don't know what the iPhone/iPad apps require as I don't own one.
> 
> Members used to be able to enter coords directly into the first page of the entry screens but we had so many false positions that Nuke decided to force the use of the map to reduce the number of sites we had to reject - and it worked. We now only reject a very few entries. Unfortunately many members aren't familiar with the various formats of GPS notation and so Nuke decided to keep it simple - select from the map only.
> 
> As for searching the map screen, this should indeed work for GPS or postcode searches - but ATM it seems to have a problem. I've just tried a test entry and it just sits there instead of searching. :roll:
> 
> Looks as if Nuke has some de-bugging to do. :roll:


Thanks.

I wa using the main site yesterday and tried searching co-ords for both entries but ended up using the map and zooming.

I still think it would help if we were able to use the search box to take us to where we think the site is and then zoom into that spot for confirmation before hitting the final button.

Anyway - I'm glad it wasn't just me doing it wrong.


----------



## spykal

mandyandandy said:


> Since I found out that it is not just member reviews I have given up adding any more.


Hi Mandy

That is a shame as your entries are, I am sure, appreciated by the members that read and use them.

The entries that you refer to as "not member reviews" are not reviews they are merely entries that list and locate all the thousands of small 5 van CLs and CSs and one or two main club sites that had never been visited or entered as reviews by any of our members. These are all to be found in the UK ... all of the sites in the rest of Europe are "member" reviews.

Why add them like that you may ask ...well many members use our database when they are out in their van or when planning a trip at home and having all of the CLs and CSs listed and mapped is a great help when looking for a suitable pitch.

If any member visits one of these "listed" campsites they are able to add a full review either by submitting a new and better full entry or by adding a members review to the existing listing.

Hope that helps everyone.

Mike


----------



## madontour

Tonyt wrote "As for searching the map screen, this should indeed work for GPS or postcode searches - but ATM it seems to have a problem. I've just tried a test entry and it just sits there instead of searching."

Tony, it could be the browser. I've just tried a test with Internet Explorer and it works fine (both gps and postcode). However, the same test with Google Chrome just sits there unresponsive.

I don't have firefox so can't try that.

Mike


----------



## tonyt

madontour said:


> Tonyt wrote "As for searching the map screen, this should indeed work for GPS or postcode searches - but ATM it seems to have a problem. I've just tried a test entry and it just sits there instead of searching."
> 
> Tony, it could be the browser. I've just tried a test with Internet Explorer and it works fine (both gps and postcode). However, the same test with Google Chrome just sits there unresponsive.
> 
> I don't have firefox so can't try that.
> 
> Mike


Thanks Mike.

I'm using Firefox at the moment but have a few more sites to add so I'll try IE later today and see what happens.

Watch this space


----------



## nukeadmin

looking at this now, thx for the pointer Mike about it being browser based


----------



## pneumatician

I gave up and must confess I use http://www.ukcampsites.co.uk/
for information on campsites now. Think its probably a bit more impartial than Club site reviews.

Steve


----------



## Chascass

Yes same here, can enter coordinates with Internet Explorer but not with Google Chrome.

Charlie


----------



## Stanner

tonyt said:


> I suspect that the majority of people using the database have sat navs and the majority of those would use co-ords.
> 
> But I may be wrong.


Yes!

I use a couple of different sat navs and have NEVER used co-ordinates.


----------



## spykal

pneumatician said:


> I gave up and must confess I use http://www.ukcampsites.co.uk/
> for information on campsites now. Think its probably a bit more impartial than Club site reviews.
> 
> Steve


Hi Steve

Not too sure about what you are saying. That website is good and I have used it too but AFAIK the website you have quoted allows campsites to pay for an entry into it's listings.

None of the sites in our database have paid a penny to get an entry.. if members do not enter and review them they do not get entered* :wink:

( * other than the autosites "listings" of the CLs and CSs five van sites )

I can also assure you that we actively encourage members to "tell it like it is" ....ie to review bad sites as well as good ones ... if you do a little googlin you will find reference to the fact that some other campsite databases edit the posted reviews ... I have no idea of the veracity of these claims but I do know that we would never reject a bad review just because it was bad.

Mike


----------



## Stanner

Well I've just tried it for the first time and so long as you know where the campsite is and have a website giving it's details open in another pane swapping the info over is easy. Finding it in Google Maps (satellite view) clicking on the rough location and then refining it to the exact spot couldn't be easier.

<Edit> "rough" added for clarity.


----------



## tonyt

tonyt said:


> madontour said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tonyt wrote "As for searching the map screen, this should indeed work for GPS or postcode searches - but ATM it seems to have a problem. I've just tried a test entry and it just sits there instead of searching."
> 
> Tony, it could be the browser. I've just tried a test with Internet Explorer and it works fine (both gps and postcode). However, the same test with Google Chrome just sits there unresponsive.
> 
> I don't have firefox so can't try that.
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks Mike.
> 
> I'm using Firefox at the moment but have a few more sites to add so I'll try IE later today and see what happens.
> 
> Watch this space
Click to expand...

Yes - works fine (almost instantly) with IE.


----------



## Cherekee

I did add an input at the beginning of this topic in which I commented about GPS data being incorrect therefore being usless, much better to pinpoint on the map.

I have just come back from hols and have added a couple of reviews to 2 CL's from Autosites the GPS data being incorrect. I would like to correct them but cannot see a way to do it via a review. I think one can edit your own campsite review but not somebody else's. Is that correct. Advice please.

Alan


----------



## spykal

Hi Alan

You are correct you can only edit your own entries which then come around to us for checking before they go back into the database.

I saw your reviews this morning and have already entered them and added the new corrected GPS locations on them from your description:- see here

Campsites << ( scroll down ...new reviews are on the right :wink: )

If you know that a GPS location is wrong on a site please just do a review and tell us where it should be ( a Google map link would be good or the decimal GPS which google map will give you if you right click on a google map position and then click on "whats here" the correct decimal format location will pop into the search bar...copy it into the review :wink: )

So thanks for the four reviews and the corrections to the GPS locations ( they were CC ones and we often find that the GPS for a CL that is listed by the CC can be way off :wink: )

Mike


----------



## nukeadmin

each campsite also has a report this campsite icon which allows you to submit a report on the campsite for issues which are rectified


----------



## Cherekee

Thank you both. I will do as suggested to update the sites. I have a few more to do reviews on.

Cheers

Alan

By the way the I Campsite USB thingy was brilliant even before the update which I only did when I got home on the w/e. Came in very usefull even though the sites I wanted did not have reviews THEN!! but do now.


----------



## bellabee

Have been following this thread and dreading entering a review - although I know that I should write some following our recent trip to Germany. Decided to take the bull by the horns and did an easy one first - added my own review to a site already reviewed by somebody else. Had an e-mail acknowledging receipt. Flushed with success, decided to have a go at actually adding a new campsite. Filled in all details required on first page then went to second page and map. Put address of site into the box (tried GPS co-ordinates first but I must have done it wrong cos it didn't work) and was satisfied that map was showing correct location, so went to bit that says when you're happy with location 'just click here', upon which my draft review disappeared. Please can someone tell me what I've done wrong? :?


----------



## carol

I am in France now and adding a review is not working. I add it and upload it but they are never downloaded with later updates of apps. Another problem is that use coordinates on phone - yes. But when the are ae to upload later the wrong coordinates are then used

It is tedious and I have been tryingnow for 5 weeks

Carol


----------



## gaspode

bellabee said:


> Please can someone tell me what I've done wrong? :?


Hi bellabee

Sorry but I can't really tell you what has gone wrong, somehow your entry has arrived for approval without any GPS references. 

All GPS positions are checked and corrected if necessary by admin before the sites are added to the database and yours will get processed as soon as one of us has some time to spare. It looks like a good entry so worth us spending some time on it.


carol said:


> I am in France now and adding a review is not working. I add it and upload it but they are never downloaded with later updates of apps. Another problem is that use coordinates on phone - yes. But when the are ae to upload later the wrong coordinates are then used
> 
> It is tedious and I have been tryingnow for 5 weeks


Hi Carol
Your reviewss ARE working, your most recent entry "Sault aire" http://www.motorhomefacts.com/modules.php?name=Campsites&op=display_results&csid=11147 was received yesterday with incorrect GPS data. It was corrected and approved last night but we have since received approx 8 re-submissions from you of that same site, all still with incorrect GPS data. 8O This happens with all the sites you submit and I don't know the reason why, maybe you are assuming that the submission hasn't been received when it actually has been? I suggest that you check the list of sites already approved before trying to re-submit sites. I think the reason for the GPS coordinates always being wrong is that you make the entry from a location other than the site in question but somehow choose to use your "current location" as the GPS position. This problem appears to affect only yourself so I've raised the matter with Nukeadmin and he will be looking at the issue once he has some free time.


----------



## carol

I am in France now and adding a review is not working. I add it and upload it but they are never downloaded with later updates of apps. Another problem is that use coordinates on phone - yes. But when the are ae to upload later the wrong coordinates are then used

It is tedious and I have been tryingnow for 5 weeks

Carol


----------



## gaspode

carol said:


> I am in France now and adding a review is not working. I add it and upload it but they are never downloaded with later updates of apps. Another problem is that use coordinates on phone - yes. But when the are ae to upload later the wrong coordinates are then used
> 
> It is tedious and I have been tryingnow for 5 weeks
> 
> Carol


Hi Carol

Maybe you should read my previous post again?

http://www.motorhomefacts.com/ftopicp-1133742.html#1133742


----------



## bellabee

I've just submitted another. In theory, it was quite easy to search for location using the map, but I'm still not sure that co-ordinates have been added.


----------



## gaspode

bellabee said:


> I've just submitted another. In theory, it was quite easy to search for location using the map, but I'm still not sure that co-ordinates have been added.


Hi bellabee

That entry was fine and complete with correct GPS, I've approved it and added it to the database. Don't have time ATM to sort the Brauereienweg-Stellplatz Hochstahl entry, hopefully I'll get around to it later. If you know the GPS coordinates it would be helpful if you could either post them or send them to me by PM.


----------



## bellabee

Thanks, Gaspode. Co-ordinates for Brauereienweg Stellplatz are 49 53 1 N/ 11 16 3 E.

For what it's worth, I'm not by any means a techno buff, but I found no problem at all in submitting Bamberg Bug campsite review.
In fact, now I'm on a roll I'll try and do some more.
Chris


----------



## carol

Ken

Tks for mail. I can only think that the new aires are not clearing here for some reason. What I see here is success. It doesn't say for what. You must have got it again as I explained I had enteredinfo for Digne and assumed that was what had uploaded. But why. Who knows why?

But why error msg meaning I can't save review when all info has been input

Also why are my add a review not being received. 

Carol


----------



## gaspode

Hi Carol

The campsite admins don't have any control of the iPhone app I'm afraid and as I use an Android phone, not an iPhone I can't relate any personal experience to your problems. All I can tell you is that the problem appears to be unique to yourself, although we did have some similar issues when the app was first released. Is your app up to date? It may be worth updating to the latest version if you haven't done so recently.

It would seem to me that your "outbox" in terms of the cache in your phone containing your submissions isn't clearing after the submissions are downloaded to the server, why new submissions aren't reaching us I haven't a clue.

The only person who could give you an answer would be Nuke and he's away at the NEC until next week. Even then, he doesn't handle the app developments himself, he uses specialist developers so may be unable to provide an immediate answer.

AFTERTHOUGHT...............
Maybe it would be better for the time being to make notes on the aires you visit and submit the reports from your PC when you're home again?


----------



## ChrisandJohn

*Reviewing a campsite - how many stars?*

In the past I had found it difficult to add reviews (can't remember the details of why) so gave up for quite a while. This summer I found my iCampsites app so useful, along with the ACSI Camping Card book and All the Aires, that I thought I ought to try submitting reviews again. So far I've done this quite successfully and have found pinpointing the co-ordinates quite easy.

My main remaining difficulty is that there are no criteria for deciding how many stars to award a site, in spite of this being a required field. So, how do you decide? Is it totally subjective or should it be based on measurable factors. I've noticed some reviewers have given quite glowing reports of a campsite / aire but have then given it 2 or 3 stars. Is this because it's lacking in some facilities?

Do others find this a problem or are you all confident that you're awarding the 'correct' number of stars?

I was going to start a thread on this topic but then though maybe it belongs here.

Chris


----------



## gaspode

*Re: Reviewing a campsite - how many stars?*



ChrisandJohn said:


> I've noticed some reviewers have given quite glowing reports of a campsite / aire but have then given it 2 or 3 stars. Is this because it's lacking in some facilities?


Hi Chris

IIRC there was a bug in the code some time ago that screwed up the ratings on some entries. It was corrected some time ago but I don't think Nuke could correct the ratings of those sites affected (only the original submitter would be able to do that) so the only thing we can do is to wait until the original submitters notice the anomoly and edit their entries. Maybe it would be a good idea for members to check their entries from time to time and update if necessary?


----------



## Zebedee

*Re: Reviewing a campsite - how many stars?*



ChrisandJohn said:


> My main remaining difficulty is that there are no criteria for deciding how many stars to award a site, in spite of this being a required field. So, how do you decide? Is it totally subjective or should it be based on measurable factors.


Hi Chris

My _subjective _opinion. :lol:

I don't see how the factors can be made measurable with so many people having such widely differing criteria, according to their individual likes, dislikes and personal circumstances.

I would suggest the most helpful mode of entry would be to award stars according to your overall impression of the site, then supplement it with any caveats or additional comments in the text entry section.

That way members can get a quick overall impression, and more detailed information if they wish to continue reading.

That's how I see it anyway.

Dave


----------



## carol

Ken tks for reply. Not easy to delete and update app whilst away but it was up to date when home

Incidentally all except one Aire have been uploaded from actual Aire. I always check to see if in and if in I add a review - but these have not appeared as I see no way to save and then upload. 

Will try updating app again when home. Am again back at the SAULT Aire after our tour. 

Carol


----------



## ChrisandJohn

*Re: Reviewing a campsite - how many stars?*



Zebedee said:


> I don't see how the factors can be made measurable with so many people having such widely differing criteria, according to their individual likes, dislikes and personal circumstances.


Good, that's exactly how I see it. I'm a great believer in subjectivity.

I think one thing that put me off reviewing when I was new to all this is I didn't have a vast experience of sites to judge how good one was in relation to how good or bad they could be. Now I have more experience of sites but I also have more experience of the wide range of requirements and preferences people have.

Chris


----------



## tonyt

I tend to use the measuring stick "Would I choose to return?"

If yes, then rate somewhere between 6 and 10. If not, then somewhere between 1 and 5.


----------



## erneboy

I find rating difficult too. It depends what you are comparing with and whether you are rating by your own criteria or those which you think might be more general. If I rate a place by my preferences then a decent level car park in a lovely rural setting with a few decent restaurants within easy walking distance would be a 7 and if there were services that would make it a 10 for me.

People who are afraid to wild camp would probably consider that a car park and not give it a rating at all. They might give a clean, tidy, all singing and dancing camp site a 9 or 10, and it might deserve it but I would not stay in it except in a case of absolute desperation.

Therefore I consider the ratings given to be pretty well irrelevant when I am deciding where to stay.

As an aside I entered a wild camping place yesterday and no matter how I tried I could not get the co-ordinates to move to the place on the map. Still had to do it the tedious way. This facility has never worked for me, Alan.


----------



## Penquin

I did one (my first one actually) and found the process fairly straightforward (and as it was well past bed-time that is a supportive statement in itself as I am normally not too good late at night......  )

as regards the ratings, I worked on the principle that if it fulfilled every criteria and was perfect it would be 10

would visit again if wanted to, but there may be reasons for a restricted choice (such as it would be busy in the summer), = 5

would not visit again = 1

and then grade between those, but they are subjective and can only be subjective, where grading sytems have been totally objective they end up meaningless.....

I was able to locate the site on the map easily, but that may be particular to that site, although the map does not show the roads correctly and gives no clue about some being totally impassable if the vehicle is larger than a bicycle......

one point that I did consider is the classification of sites - there are inconsistnecies as to how they are entered, with e.g some being called "Aire at..." and appearing early in any list, others "Aire Communale at...." and appearing later and others by the geogrpahical location - e.g. Sarlat appearing much later in a list.

Since I suspect we all go through a list for an area from the top to locate what we want such inconsitencies may not help....... (I put my "Wild camping site near" like that - and it appears at the end of the list for obvious reasons.

*PERHAPS* (and this may be impossible) the entry should be geographical first then type e.g. Castelnaud, Wild camping rather than "Wild camping near Castelnaud",

just a thought to raise one observation I have made - and it probably means that I have overlooked something somewhere which does this already!!!  

But the resource is very useful and is readily available,

Dave


----------



## peejay

Penquin said:


> one point that I did consider is the classification of sites - there are inconsistnecies as to how they are entered, with e.g some being called "Aire at..." and appearing early in any list, others "Aire Communale at...." and appearing later and others by the geogrpahical location - e.g. Sarlat appearing much later in a list.
> 
> Since I suspect we all go through a list for an area from the top to locate what we want such inconsitencies may not help....... (I put my "Wild camping site near" like that - and it appears at the end of the list for obvious reasons.
> 
> *PERHAPS* (and this may be impossible) the entry should be geographical first then type e.g. Castelnaud, Wild camping rather than "Wild camping near Castelnaud",
> 
> just a thought to raise one observation I have made - and it probably means that I have overlooked something somewhere which does this already!!!


Dave, there is no need to put 'wildcamping at' or 'aire at' before the place name as the actual category it is in already tells you that.

I'm in the process of tidying up/ammending entries like this but its a time consuming task.

By the way, you have a PM :wink:

Pete


----------



## meavy

*GPS entry: campsite reviews*

Browsing through these 2011 entries, I find I'm experiencing some of the same problems. I've a notebook full of campsites I'd like to share, but having spent over an hour this morning trying to write them up, I feel I've not got anywhere and am lying down for a little rest.

The main difficulty seems to be that 'the system' won't accept GPS data in any format. I cut and paste the GPS from the site but it won't upload. So I have added it to the body of the review and made a rough stab at where the location is on the map on the following page. Not really good enough for anyone navigating to the destination, sorry.

Does anyone know if there is a 'keep me logged in' button? I seem to have to log in again too frequently as I browse. I've just renewed my sub...


----------



## gaspode

Hi meavy

The MHS database only accepts GPS positions in the decimal degrees format. This is the current default standard for most modern mapping application (and more importantly from our pespective for Google Maps). Entries should look like:

50.965189,1.843085

If you copy and paste the above into Google maps it should take you to the entrance to the Calais aire.

No north, south, east or west markers are used, for a west bearing you simply place a minus sign in front of the easting bearing:

47.279695,-2.165108

This bearing should take you to the centre of the pont de St Nazaire.

If you want to find the bearing for any location, just find your location on Google maps and "right click" your mouse on the exact spot then select from the drop-down menu "what's here". This will then generate the exact GPS bearing in the search box. You can then copy the contents of the search box and use it elsewhere. Most Sat-Navs will also generate and accept bearings in this format but you'll probably have to set the preferences in the main menu.

If anyone has difficulties with the GPS format when entering campsites, they can either use the map for location (map page appears when you save your entry form) or just leave a note somewhere in the text. In most cases, if you've included an address or a good description of where the site is, the admin staff will be able to locate and add it for you anyway.


----------



## meavy

*Thanks Gaspode*

Yes, we use GPS all the time in both formats on our TomTom and they have taken us into very interesting predicaments as well as leading us to our proper destination. It's only on the MHF campsite data base that I am having problems with.

Having said that, I see a couple of my reviews have just been accepted with enough GPS for fellow motorhomers to be getting on with.

Thanks again.


----------



## 75guys

*Sites map on website*

Why oh why is it so difficult to extract information from the reviews section of the website, or the sites map?

I was doubtful about renewing my membership, but gave you the benefit of the doubt today. I regretted it at once.

Simple searches (achievable on other campsite websites) are not achievable on MH Facts. I'm constantly switched to areas or sites that I'm not interested in, and can't access info for sites or areas that I am interested in.

This has been going on for a couple of years, and doesn't seem to be addressed by MH Facts at all. The same problems persist.

When I tried to send in a comment via the sites map section, I'm asked if I'm a SKY subscriber, and when I say no, the screen disappears. What IS going on?

Would someone from MH Facts please reassure me that they are aware of these issues, and fix them?


----------



## rayc

*Re: Sites map on website*



> 75guys said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would someone from MH Facts please reassure me that they are aware of these issues, and fix them?
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are under some sort of misapprehension of how the forum is currently managed.
> 
> If it was broke when Nuke sold it then, in my opinion, unless it is the core forum then it will remain broken, an example being the photo albums.
Click to expand...


----------



## 75guys

*Sites map on website*

Thanks rayc, and yes, I am uncertain about how it operates.

I had thought that it was run as an offshoot of the Outdoor Bits business, which is clearly a commercial operation.

I have no knowledge of the history of the site, or who Nuke is or was. Since we pay a fee to Outdoor Bits to access the site, someone is making money out of it, and I don't have a problem with that, but they have a duty to maintain the site.

If I've got that all wrong, then who actually runs the site, and banks the fees I and others pay?


----------



## rayc

*Re: Sites map on website*



> 75guys said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I've got that all wrong, then who actually runs the site, and banks the fees I and others pay?
> 
> 
> 
> That is a very interesting question. I believe the site is now owned and run by a Canadian company but the subscriptions are still paid to Outdoor Bits.
> How that is all tied up commercially I have absolutely no idea but does it matter? What matters is that the forum functions and that those parts that do not are fixed or removed. I will not hold my breath whilst waiting.
Click to expand...


----------

