I see the last two posts here, among other things, are again discussing Historical Places.
For those of you that are interested I developed a suggestion in this area. It was titled “THREE SUGGESTED ENHANCEMENT FOR IMPROVING UTILIZATION OF PLACE NAMES IN FTM”
It was posted on 31 March 2012 at 3:30PM on the thread “How to Combine Oklahoma, USA with Oklahoma, USA in ‘Places’
The portion dealing with Historical Places is the second suggestion
I sent this to the development group towards the end of March 2012. So far I have not received any response from them [I assume the reason I have not heard from them is because it was such a great suggestion that they are working fast and furiously to develop and implement it]
Kidding aside, my feeling is that users can have a significant impact on improving FTM, we just have to persevere
For those of you that are interested I developed a suggestion in this area. It was titled “THREE SUGGESTED ENHANCEMENT FOR IMPROVING UTILIZATION OF PLACE NAMES IN FTM”
It was posted on 31 March 2012 at 3:30PM on the thread “How to Combine Oklahoma, USA with Oklahoma, USA in ‘Places’
The portion dealing with Historical Places is the second suggestion
I sent this to the development group towards the end of March 2012. So far I have not received any response from them [I assume the reason I have not heard from them is because it was such a great suggestion that they are working fast and furiously to develop and implement it]
Kidding aside, my feeling is that users can have a significant impact on improving FTM, we just have to persevere