| Changeset | # | Tmstmp UTC | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 166594678 by amitshrivastava_lyft @ 2025-05-22 05:37 | 1 | 2025-06-10 01:36 | MikeN | What was the date of the telemetry and imagery used for this change? This was only changed over on May 16-18 and any data before that would be completely different. |
| 2 | 2025-06-11 10:06 | YuliyaShustava_lyft ♦45 | Hi, MikeN! My name is Yuliya, and I am the Quality Control Lead on the OSM team at Lyft.Thank you for your feedback. The road geometry was mistakenly adjusted based on Lyft-owned satellite imagery dated January 2025 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dXSBm1wuLjhdpcTJqsfXFz7ALXwkSDNP/view?usp=driv... | |
| 167148352 by MikeN @ 2025-06-03 18:46 | 1 | 2025-06-03 18:48 | MikeN | Aerial from NAIP |
| 166983438 by MikeN @ 2025-05-30 17:29 | 1 | 2025-05-30 17:32 | MikeN | Also removed nonexistent TIGER import roads |
| 166839107 by US Forest Service @ 2025-05-27 18:24 | 1 | 2025-05-28 01:52 | MassCartog ♦119 | Hi, Welcome to OSM. In this changeset you removed a trail that seems to have a good amount of heatmap activity data, its visible in Lidar data, and some parts are visible with aerial imagery not covered by tree canopy. By all accounts it seems to exist on the ground regardless of being illegal. ... |
| 2 | 2025-05-28 10:15 | US Forest Service ♦1 | This trail was decommissioned years ago and not pat for US Forest Service national trails. We can't close it or have other people use the reroute, if this old trail still exist. when can I edit the tags then if I can't remove the trail. | |
| 3 | 2025-05-28 11:17 | MikeN | It is still listed in https://foothillstrail.org/portfolio/round-mountain-gap/ The trail has been restored in changeset #166870794 | |
| 4 | 2025-05-28 13:07 | MassCartog ♦119 | User MikeN restored the trails. Now you are able to go update the access tags for the trails. To do this click on the effected trails, find the "allowed access" section, and put "no" under "all". Alternatively you can go to the "Tag" section and add a new tag ... | |
| 166113391 by cristopheridlc @ 2025-05-11 15:13 | 1 | 2025-05-12 22:41 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for these edits! The surfaced residential roadway may be extended inside a subdivision where roads may not be paved today but will be in the next few months. In this subdivision, it would be good to keep the roads marked under construction between the east and west sides until they... |
| 165740988 by MikeN @ 2025-05-03 00:43 | 1 | 2025-05-03 16:58 | user_5359 ♦19,375 | Hello! Please have look on https://www.osm.org/way/1383086134 (one of four objects). What is the mean of the tag Freeman = Park? |
| 2 | 2025-05-03 21:38 | MikeN | Thanks for catching this - it was a typo as I was figuring out the Terracing plugin. | |
| 165527586 by Sebastian Kowalik @ 2025-04-28 01:09 | 1 | 2025-04-29 12:42 | MikeN | Nice job building out Millegeville! Tip - pressing Q after drawing buildings will make them square. |
| 2 | 2025-04-29 20:23 | Sebastian Kowalik ♦1 | Thanks for the tip! | |
| 161588541 by rsitoni_Lyft @ 2025-01-21 07:11 | 1 | 2025-04-25 21:54 | MikeN | Hi, When encountering a construction area with roads under construction (highway=construction), just modify the existing construction roads to their final form, such as highway = residential. Please do not trace new roads over the existing construciton roads. |
| 2 | 2025-04-28 10:08 | rsitoni_Lyft ♦1 | Hi, MikeN! My name is Ravinder, and I’m a mapper in the OSM team at Lyft. I apologize for adding new roads over the existing construction roads, and would like to assure you that I am taking steps to prevent similar mistakes from happening in the future.Thank you very much for bringing it ... | |
| 165092834 by MikeN @ 2025-04-18 01:01 | 1 | 2025-04-20 02:12 | watmildon ♦244 | When this showed up in my "missing mascots" file I thought for sure it was a typo. We a lovely a weird mascot lol.https://github.com/watmildon/HighSchoolMascotMap/commit/ed64192deed4d36591710872c758f5eb2b484e41 |
| 2 | 2025-04-20 14:07 | MikeN | I'm just glad it didn't come out as the "Blue Hosers"! | |
| 164687321 by michaelhthomas @ 2025-04-08 16:22 | 1 | 2025-04-09 00:07 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap! Thank you for adding this curb detail; it looks good and it's the last major piece of the local sidewalk network. |
| 162682819 by chrishop @ 2025-02-19 01:58 | 1 | 2025-02-19 12:28 | MikeN | Hi, I cannot find "The Gulf of Williamston" mentioned in the city or mayor news releases. |
| 2 | 2025-02-19 13:06 | chrishop ♦1 | Link to news releasehttps://www.facebook.com/search/top/?q=williamston%20rockey%20burgess | |
| 3 | 2025-02-19 13:53 | MikeN | Thanks - that is on his personal page. Unless BR549 (LOL) becomes real, this would be at best loc_name or nickname . | |
| 162404343 by vanessatryfi @ 2025-02-11 19:31 | 1 | 2025-02-12 03:21 | MikeN | Hi, what was the reason for this change? The dog park is attached to the bar building, but the whole area is not under a roof. |
| 2 | 2025-02-12 03:24 | vanessatryfi ♦1 | The dog park is also indoors in this location | |
| 162374492 by nullkid10 @ 2025-02-11 03:12 | 1 | 2025-02-11 13:13 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! This looks like a good representation of the park features. It looks like there is also a basketball court and walkway connecting to Creekwood Court that could be added. |
| 2 | 2025-02-11 15:50 | nullkid11 ♦1 | Indeed there is! I'm not sure if secondary accounts are a good idea for map edits, so I'll add these features once I am able to access that account again (I am not in a place where I can login to my Google account currently). Thanks! | |
| 162068613 by Critter1 @ 2025-02-03 02:19 | 1 | 2025-02-03 14:03 | MikeN | Thank you for this fix. I rechecked that street section and there is no longer a proper cycle lane, bicycle sign or sharrow. So I have also removed the bicycle-designated tag. But I added the traffic table and crossings near the Grand Bohemian. |
| 161939714 by dannmer @ 2025-01-30 14:25 | 1 | 2025-01-31 02:33 | MikeN | Why were these removed? They appeared to be just micro-mapping from the imagery. The tagging might not have been correct, but the feature geometries matched. |
| 161098909 by suebrown1117 @ 2025-01-07 14:56 | 1 | 2025-01-08 15:04 | MikeN | The comment implies bicycles permitted, but this change sets bicycle=no ? |
| 159893534 by LjubanK @ 2024-12-03 19:01 | 1 | 2024-12-03 23:20 | MikeN | Hi, why was this marked as residential? |
| 158901423 by MaxWIS @ 2024-11-08 15:58 | 1 | 2024-11-08 23:58 | MikeN | Hi, Please don't delete and recreate road segments. Add, remove, or change the tags when needed.The original street marking of the road under the bridge was more informative since it had the height restriction. There is no longer any information here to prevent routers from sending overs... |
| 158856991 by MaxWIS @ 2024-11-07 13:52 | 1 | 2024-11-07 21:40 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! For this edit, the tracks above are marked as being the bridge. Normally there is no special attribute for roads below bridges except for maxheight which was already marked. |
| 157679580 by Joseph R P @ 2024-10-09 16:11 | 1 | 2024-10-10 20:00 | MikeN | Hi, Why was I 40 marked as open? This was marked closed because the repair will take multiple months, possibly nearly a year and it will be useful to know for those using OSM for routing. https://drivenc.gov/?type=incident&id=713873 |
| 2 | 2024-10-10 22:17 | Joseph R P ♦342 | Initially, I changed I 40 back to standard motorway tags in another edit for a couple reasons:highway=construction tags should only be used on roads that are actually under construction and do not yet exist (i.e. I 40 is being built here rather than closed for damages).The second reason woul... | |
| 156120960 by MapCheckMate @ 2024-09-03 01:02 | 1 | 2024-09-20 14:15 | MikeN | Please take care when moving the map - it is easy to accidentally drag nodes as happened here. Tip: Most houses have square corners, and the Q will make them look neater. |
| 156765780 by whammo @ 2024-09-18 10:34 | 1 | 2024-09-18 10:58 | MikeN | This is good work - FYI The OSM NC - SC boundary was separately updated in 2018 from the ratified NC-SC Geodetic survey, so those nodes shouldn't be moved unless they were accidentally dragged since then. |
| 2 | 2024-09-18 12:06 | whammo ♦83 | Thanks Mike. I try not to touch the state boundaries because those are by and large much more recently updated, as you mention. I may have slid a node or two laterally along the state border because the county border "intersection" was slightly misplaced. | |
| 154405473 by Adam5940 @ 2024-07-25 17:40 | 1 | 2024-07-26 01:07 | MikeN | Normally driveways are retained on OpenStreetMap because they can provide hints to delivery or ride-share drivers. If there are no-trespassing signs or gates, the driveways can also be marked as access = private. |
| 152463654 by perfectstorm007 @ 2024-06-09 16:50 | 1 | 2024-06-11 23:44 | MikeN | Hi, normally access=private is used when there is a gate or no trespassing sign. If it is just private ownership but accessed the same as a public road, it would be marked ownership=private . But there may be a sign or gate that doesn't show on imagery. |
| 2 | 2024-06-12 00:15 | perfectstorm007 ♦1 | Gotcha! This one definitely had a sign at the neighborhood mailbox that noted it was private. I’ve been trying to run all the roads in my county and have come across a lot of private ones. Even some county roads that people try to claim as private. | |
| 152056708 by Thanos6 @ 2024-05-30 22:39 | 1 | 2024-05-31 12:58 | MikeN | Hi, normally apartment areas are defined as landuse=residential and residential=apartments rather than one large apartment building. |
| 22871440 by MikeN @ 2014-06-11 13:27 | 1 | 2024-05-03 09:41 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,632 | Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2911118350/history has shop = alterations that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)shop=alterations ? What kind of alterations? Of clothing? Of engines? |
| 2 | 2024-05-03 11:04 | MikeN | Updated tag to more standard OSM tag tailor | |
| 148925398 by Mannivu @ 2024-03-20 17:26 | 1 | 2024-04-18 14:35 | cpwm ♦1 | "Tires" is the correct and common spelling for all of the United States of America. I cannot speak to any of the surrounding territories, or even it's bordering countries but in the USA "tyres" is a typo. |
| 2 | 2024-04-18 16:24 | Mannivu ♦213 | OSM prefers British English, so tyres is the correct form https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:service:vehicle:tyres%3Dyes | |
| 3 | 2024-04-18 16:44 | cpwm ♦1 | I don't agree with your response. I would appreciate if you would entertain my comments as they would possible benefit all of the current US population and the countless visitors to the USA. "Tires" per the wiki is a, 'Possible tagging mistake'. Emphasis on 'possible�... | |
| 4 | 2024-04-18 17:33 | Mannivu ♦213 | The services of a shop should be handled by the application, not by the user. If the application is correctly written it should know that even if the user writes "tire" it should search for "tyres" tags. Moreover, I think it's very wrong to have a tag working only for a stat... | |
| 5 | 2024-04-18 17:56 | cpwm ♦1 | "a state"-as in a single state?-the United States of America has 50 states and 5 territories with about 340,000,000 population. Nevermind.¯\\_(ツ)_/¯ | |
| 6 | 2024-04-18 18:10 | MikeN | The actual spelling of tags is not important - the application needs to know that "blowout", "flat" and "tire" can suggest tire shops. The database key value happens to be 'tyre' but that is hidden from the end consumer. There is a significant value to the ... | |
| 7 | 2024-04-18 18:14 | Mannivu ♦213 | State, country, whatever. It's the USA (340 million) vs the rest of the world (6660 million). | |
| 8 | 2024-04-18 18:50 | cpwm ♦1 | It's not a USA vs. the rest of world situation... that attitude defeats the entire collaborative approach of open source. It was noted as a typo. All I'm saying is that it's not a typo for North America and Canada... if the responsibility is on the application that uses OSM data to ma... | |
| 9 | 2024-04-18 18:54 | Mannivu ♦213 | I used "typo" meaning that it's a typo for OSM tags, I know that it's not a typo. Since British English is preferred in OSM, "tyre" is the preferred in OSM. | |
| 150055073 by Clemson PATS @ 2024-04-15 19:22 | 1 | 2024-04-15 21:41 | MikeN | Hi - why were the parking lots deleted? They still exist. |
| 2 | 2024-04-15 22:41 | Clemson PATS ♦1 | @MikeN we are transitioning to a new parking app and we are labeling the lots already. A lot of the lots have the wrong numbers and are always changing. With the lots gone it is less to manage on the new app. | |
| 3 | 2024-04-16 02:09 | MikeN | Thanks for clarifying. Do you plan to add the lots back with the new numbers? Otherwise the next mapper will add the parking lots again when they notice them missing. | |
| 148308638 by TransAct - KB @ 2024-03-06 18:07 | 1 | 2024-03-07 15:29 | Xvtn ♦468 | Hello again! This changeset also looks super. One additional tip is that if it seems like thru traffic is not allowed here, ie it's a private road, you could also add access=private so that routing engines won't try to send travelers through there. But that's just an extra piece of in... |
| 2 | 2024-03-13 16:14 | TransAct - KB ♦1 | Hello, If I were to mark the access as private, would that restrict other users, such as delivery drivers, from going down the road?I am running into issues with the routing engine taking school buses down private driveways for re-routing after a wrong turn. This is potentially dangerous since p... | |
| 3 | 2024-03-14 18:28 | Xvtn ♦468 | It depends on the system that's consuming OSM data. It's umlikely that neither school bus or delivery drivers use purely OpenStreetMap for their routing data, if at all. The OSM routing app I use will ask me something like "It seems like the only way to access your destination is via ... | |
| 4 | 2024-03-14 18:49 | MikeN | Using the setting access=destination should help - delivery drivers would be directed there as long as the delivery is on that road, but GPS should not give directions using that road as a connection from one to another. | |
| 148121167 by Vidyac @ 2024-03-02 08:00 | 1 | 2024-03-02 19:09 | MikeN | Hi, what was the reason for downgrading this section which connects other tertiary roads? |
| 147645023 by SilverMapping @ 2024-02-19 11:08 | 1 | 2024-02-19 22:53 | MikeN | Hi, welcome to OSM! The bike lanes on North Main are already identified. They are included with the roadway tags because there is no barrier between the cycle lane and the auto lane. Please see the Wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycleway%3Dlane |
| 2 | 2024-02-19 23:00 | SilverMapping ♦1 | Okay, got it! Should I remove them? | |
| 3 | 2024-02-20 00:01 | MikeN | Yes, they can be removed since they are a duplicate. Thanks! | |
| 147646619 by SilverMapping @ 2024-02-19 11:48 | 1 | 2024-02-19 22:55 | MikeN | Nice job adding these sidewalks, thanks! |
| 147040927 by akadouri @ 2024-02-04 04:58 | 1 | 2024-02-09 05:24 | MxxCon ♦3,359 | Wouldn't it be cleaner to map this as tags of the road itself? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/147040927 |
| 2 | 2024-02-10 16:20 | akadouri ♦58 | I updated the area to parking=street_side & the way to parking:left=separate. I would be fine removing the area and tagging the road with parking:left=street_side. I'm not familiar with which is more common.https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147299084 | |
| 3 | 2024-02-10 16:43 | MikeN | A method of adding to street VS area may work better in one area than another. It can get pretty abstract when counting spaces, handicap, and maximum allowed parking times left / right and as a result the street could be chopped into many pieces along a block | |
| 4 | 2024-02-10 17:03 | MxxCon ♦3,359 | Could use https://zlant.github.io/parking-lanes/ to make parking tagging easier.There's also https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Street_parking#Separately_mapped_parking_areas_and_spaces | |
| 146466501 by CurlingMan13 @ 2024-01-20 06:07 | 1 | 2024-01-20 14:31 | MTolman ♦1 | CurlingMan13 - quit editing my property. You don't need to add sidewalks etc. The private road was removed because the delivery algorithms are ignoring the private tag and amazon comes through every day. You will have amazon mad when I put up gates and spikes. Just leave it alone. I unders... |
| 2 | 2024-01-20 22:05 | MikeN | Hi, I'd recommend setting access=no to the bollards, as well as the middle connecting track. Possibly even set the type to track as well. Ideally the roads would remain present to prevent someone else coming later and adding them again with the wrong access tags. (Amazon has to deliver t... | |
| 3 | 2024-01-21 03:21 | Allison P ♦1,136 | It's not your property. You don't own OpenStreetMap. It is mystifying how when a government allows someone exclusive rights to a property of land how many believe they have become the arbiter of reality. Anyone can make a map of your property, and even if it were illegal for them to do so ... | |
| 4 | 2024-02-02 23:09 | MTolman ♦1 | Thank you Mike N. To Allison - apparently the lawyers disagree with you. Yep - consulted with them to check you out. No worries we added features to the roads now that we wont document and they can come retrieve their vehicles with tow trucks now. Yep - local police have been consulted and advis... | |
| 5 | 2024-02-03 00:43 | Allison P ♦1,136 | Enjoy your spikes. Not sure why you needed your lawyers to look at me and disagree or what the "better way" you wanted me to help was. | |
| 145089999 by RAHinton @ 2023-12-13 21:17 | 1 | 2023-12-13 21:59 | MikeN | Hi, Please save changes from one area before moving to a new location. Otherwise they appear as changes that span countries. |
| 144245690 by MikeN @ 2023-11-20 12:41 | 1 | 2023-11-21 03:32 | CurlingMan13 ♦2,042 | Permanently? Source? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144245690 |
| 2 | 2023-11-21 11:48 | MikeN | It's permanently closed, last tee-off day already took place https://www.facebook.com/LegacyPinesGC Will make way for the additional residential development. | |
| 144018622 by pgerendl @ 2023-11-14 16:56 | 1 | 2023-11-14 17:59 | MikeN | Hi, I took a look at this but cannot see what was wrong with the original stop sign placement. |
| 2 | 2023-11-15 03:45 | pgerendl ♦1 | Hi, thankyou for going through the edit and reviewing the changeset. There was one stop sign missing at other intersection. We have corrected it in changeset: 144033989. Regards,pgerendl | |
| 143978487 by dgoliver @ 2023-11-13 16:42 | 1 | 2023-11-13 18:11 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! Thanks for adding all the buildings in your area. Just a note...don't put a description for the name, like "House" or "Shed". Most residential buildings are unnamed. The correct tag for the building denotes how the building is used, like "building=hou... |
| 143075256 by Saucon Support @ 2023-10-24 17:03 Active block | 1 | 2023-11-05 17:20 | MikeN | Hi, This was verified that this section is still signed at 60 mph on 2023-11-05 and there are no plans to change it. Restored to original setting |
| 141867980 by ScottPetenero @ 2023-09-28 14:47 | 1 | 2023-09-30 01:17 | MikeN | Hi, This trail is rugged enough that mountain bikes are not allowed, as well as having a significant elevation change. It doesn't seem to fit the category of hiking - "Terrain level or slightly inclined; no risk of falling with appropriate behaviour. ". |
| 2 | 2023-10-02 20:48 | ScottPetenero ♦1 | I wouldn't say the elevation change is very significant, and I believe that the reason for not allowing MTB is due to the exposed roots and rockier areas, which are easily navigable on foot. I suppose, to be on a safer side, it would be fine to leave it as mountain | |
| 141099496 by Aneeket Singh @ 2023-09-11 08:44 | 1 | 2023-09-11 11:24 | MikeN | Hi, the actual start / end exit for the tollway is Exit 44, and segments to the west do not require tolls. https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=41.75161640000002&lng=-89.64691720000002&z=17&pKey=704110920549521&focus=photo&x=Infinity&y=Infinity&zoom=1.7032000350404075 |
| 138085726 by cmitchell @ 2023-07-04 02:05 | 1 | 2023-07-04 14:30 | MikeN | Hi, thanks for these updates. Although both spellings are correct for English, OSM uses the original spelling as the established tag. https://github.com/openstreetmap/id-tagging-schema/issues/943 |
| 123851112 by MikeN @ 2022-07-20 13:13 | 1 | 2023-06-12 20:22 | watmildon ♦244 | Hello!While doing some cleanup of cities from the ESRI Address feed, I noticed some of the addr:city here ended up as "Unincorporated". I'm happy to patch them up using the USPS zip locator but wanted to let you know in case you think there's a better solution.Matt |
| 2 | 2023-06-13 11:09 | MikeN | Thanks for catching this - the source data changed their city designation and I missed it. If you can apply the zip to correct the city, that would be great. Thanks! | |
| 3 | 2023-06-13 20:16 | watmildon ♦244 | You got it. I have a big cleanup of these in my work queue. Hopefully get to them all over the next few weeks. | |
| 4 | 2023-06-19 18:20 | watmildon ♦244 | I have completed the US update for this type of issue. | |
| 5 | 2023-06-20 09:53 | MikeN | Thanks! | |
| 136641257 by upstatesc88 @ 2023-05-28 01:11 | 1 | 2023-05-28 11:37 | MikeN | Hi, Thanks for adding these houses. A tip: houses look much better with square corners. You can square them up by selecting and then pressing the Q key. Thanks. |
| 2 | 2023-05-29 21:40 | upstatesc88 ♦2 | Thank you for the feedback! I'm pretty inexperienced here and there's a lot to learn! | |
| 135993829 by cbhackmeyer @ 2023-05-11 20:56 | 1 | 2023-05-12 12:21 | MikeN | Hi, These addresses were unique because they specified different unit letters. I can restore those addresses if that is OK. |
| 2 | 2023-05-13 21:21 | cbhackmeyer ♦6 | Oh, sorry about that. Should have checked the history but was working from Vespucci, which doesn't conspicuously show unit letters / numbers, and the way they were so tightly clustered in one area of the building led me to assume they were probably duplicates created by a bot or something.T... | |
| 135906360 by Jethron @ 2023-05-09 17:52 | 1 | 2023-05-10 15:18 | MikeN | Normal regional trail conventions in OpenStreetmap have the name on the relation, which may pass through many communities - each of which know the section by its own name. The local name would be the 'name' tag assigned to the local section. In this case the local trail is signed as �... |
| 133351060 by shinylman @ 2023-03-06 07:25 | 1 | 2023-03-06 22:12 | MikeN | Yes, it appears that most should be paths or sidewalks. When this changeset was originally made, there was construction to the north that probably migrated some mistaken tagging. |
| 116263701 by Hiausirg_Import @ 2022-01-17 17:12 | 1 | 2023-02-14 03:37 | CurlingMan13 ♦2,042 | These buildings are not very well aligned... Ugh. |
| 2 | 2023-02-27 18:59 | CurlingMan13 ♦2,042 | These buildings need to be squared... | |
| 3 | 2023-02-27 20:10 | Allison P ♦1,136 | The unreviewed Bing import that got this user blocked for 10 years is bad? Guess you have to revert it... | |
| 4 | 2023-02-27 21:38 | CurlingMan13 ♦2,042 | Here's where the mess starts, the imports are obnoxiously big, and some buildings have added additional details added, such as address. Do you know if there is a way to filter those out? (I don't use JOSM). | |
| 5 | 2023-02-28 01:06 | Allison P ♦1,136 | I believe if you revert all the changesets at once, and just choose to resolve any conflicts toward what's on the server (assume edits made after the import make the building now usable) you can correct most of the damage.May be good to ask for help in the OSM Slack. There are definitely so... | |
| 6 | 2023-03-01 16:50 | zluuzki ♦224 | - Which buildings are "not very well aligned"?- Which buildings are "not squared"?By the way, "some" buildings which are "not *very* well" aligned and "not squared" (unless veery bad) is not a good reason to delete someone's work. If you t... | |
| 7 | 2023-03-01 17:26 | MikeN | Please use caution before reverting old imports for 'poor quality'. In some cases the best imagery at time of import may not have revealed that additional corrections were needed. | |
| 8 | 2023-03-01 18:23 | Allison P ♦1,136 | It's not your work. We've been over this: your "manual review" is either a façade or product of incompetence. Everyone knows what you've done here, including the DWG. Continuing to lie about it just makes people mad. I'm happy to give you a list of bad footprints... | |
| 9 | 2023-03-01 18:24 | Allison P ♦1,136 | I generally agree MikeN, but that is not the case here. Other imports of this sort of data by the same user have been proven problematic and even acknowledged as such by the DWG. | |
| 10 | 2023-03-01 18:47 | Allison P ♦1,136 | I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say this and its neighbor were visible on all aerial when you made this edit: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1022020937https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1010562596 is totally offhttps://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1010563197 and the rest of th... | |
| 11 | 2023-03-02 10:51 | zluuzki ♦224 | "We've been over this...Continuing to lie"Repeating the same wrong information over and over again won't make it true. I know how many stuff I've fixed before uploading."Everyone" You're not "everyone", so don't speak for everyone."it... | |
| 12 | 2023-03-02 11:20 | Allison P ♦1,136 | You started this back up. Could've let it be, and maybe no one would've bothered to revert this import...The lie came just as predicted. The small portion of your data can apparently be quickly and easily observed. If it's so easily seen by me to be wrong, why not you? Is it becau... | |
| 13 | 2023-03-02 11:26 | Allison P ♦1,136 | That's a serious offer, by the way. I'm probably running close to a block of my own with this commentary. I'd like to close this off beforehand. Perhaps me reverting this now and just shutting up is the best way to end this discussion. Does that work, or will that just add fuel to the... | |
| 132275537 by awiii @ 2023-02-08 20:40 | 1 | 2023-02-08 22:56 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! When correcting a shape, it is best to modify the existing shape to maintain history rather than delete and redraw. However that can be laborious when there is a big difference. In that case it is best to copy existing tags (like the building address) to the new object. In th... |
| 131828086 by Acilius @ 2023-01-29 02:49 | 1 | 2023-01-29 13:24 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! Thanks for setting the road name. Note that lanes=1 means that when 2 cars meet, they cannot pass each other. Ordinarily this would be 2 lanes for a typical road that is not one-way. |
| 2 | 2023-01-29 14:14 | Acilius ♦1 | Thanks SO much for your friendly response! (was a very welcomed surprise) Well noted! | |
| 130083005 by perfectstorm007 @ 2022-12-14 16:43 | 1 | 2022-12-14 18:42 | MikeN | Hi, this road appears to be privately owned, but not gated and therefore not privately accessed. Bing streetview also does not show a no-trespassing sign. It had been previously created as a 'residential' road. It should be changed to type service / driveway and the 'private�... |
| 130081299 by perfectstorm007 @ 2022-12-14 15:51 | 1 | 2022-12-14 18:28 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! This is the correct use of the access private tag since it is gated. |
| 130074526 by reh999 @ 2022-12-14 12:40 | 1 | 2022-12-14 13:32 | MikeN | Hi, Normally the address point is placed on the residence at the end of the driveway instead of the middle of the road. Amazon uses this to assist with delivery. |
| 2 | 2022-12-14 13:56 | reh999 ♦1 | OK. Not intuiting how to move it, so will delete and redo. Thanks for letting me know the convention and reasoning. | |
| 128787061 by evanave @ 2022-11-11 17:42 | 1 | 2022-11-12 00:20 | MikeN | Hi, some POIs are added to the outline rather than as a node. The POIs in this changeset duplicate the businesses already on the building outlines. |
| 128782902 by evanave @ 2022-11-11 15:50 | 1 | 2022-11-12 00:19 | MikeN | Hi, welcome to OSM! Buildings are aligned with the base of the building rather than the roof. This is so the position of the walls is most accurate since the aerial photo may have been taken from an angle. Also, although the OSM term apartments applies to current usage, a building built as a chu... |
| 128635409 by "calimoto - Motorcycle Team - Marek" @ 2022-11-08 11:07 | 1 | 2022-11-08 15:18 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for this edit. The saddle point really exists, as shown on the Topo imagery. Why was it removed? |
| 2 | 2022-11-09 16:37 | MikeN | Restored in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/128695492 | |
| 3 | 2022-11-18 00:04 | SomeoneElse ♦13,368 | @MikeN - I've asked the user to reply here via https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6545 . | |
| 4 | 2022-11-18 09:33 | "calimoto - Motorcycle Team - Marek" ♦6 | hey thanks for your change. I mixed up this saddle with another one and thought that this one was wrong. But this saddle really exists. | |
| 128231397 by shinylman @ 2022-10-30 02:20 | 1 | 2022-10-31 14:01 | MikeN | I have no strong opinion on this, but the trend in OSM classification is toward connectivity rather than lanes, traffic counts, width, etc. That would tend to move them toward tertiary. |
| 2 | 2022-10-31 16:17 | shinylman ♦4 | Thanks for the information, I will keep this in mind. | |
| 128262422 by RevHN2018 @ 2022-10-30 20:28 | 1 | 2022-10-31 12:17 | MikeN | This is a good edit, but the map program taking a shortcut through the traffic light has a big oversight if they treat the ramp and light as zero routing cost. Magic Earth and Osmand route as expected. |
| 126843395 by Baloo Uriza @ 2022-09-30 23:16 | 1 | 2022-10-07 07:52 | sbelemey ♦52 | Hello, Baloo Uriza! I noticed that you have added many roads primary and trunks which intersect actual roads and causing issues in OSM roads connectivity, as I can see the edit were done by JOSM, did you plan to do such edits? And what is the ground truth for them?best regards,sbelemey |
| 2 | 2022-10-07 11:49 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | US 81 is mostly what I was working on in this changeset, this particular one getting details around Enid (lanes in particular) updated.Might I ask why this is drawing hostility now after I've been working on lanes for basically a decade at this point? | |
| 3 | 2022-10-10 10:57 | sbelemey ♦52 | Hello!Thanks for your answer. I’m sorry if it looks like hostility, but I just really don’t found any source for this road, and it also does not connect to other roads, that’s why I just were worried that maybe it wasn’t planned mapping. best regards,sbelemey | |
| 4 | 2022-10-25 23:13 | boopington ♦66 | is this supposed to be some testing? | |
| 5 | 2022-10-26 00:17 | MikeN | It looks like US 81 was duplicated, for example this stop sign is in the middle of Lake Ellsworth. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10065537792 | |
| 6 | 2022-10-26 00:47 | boopington ♦66 | yea im starting to wonder if he hasn't noticed it. | |
| 7 | 2022-10-26 01:28 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | You're right, I didn't see it until you pointed out the Lake Ellsworth giveaway. I'm fairly certain this goof was limited to just the pasted version, but I'm doublechecking. | |
| 8 | 2022-10-26 01:39 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | OK, looks like it was a clean copy and transform missing the relation, so this *should* be fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/128060909My confusion was definitely the buried lede, copying US 81 to the southwest was definitely not my intention. | |
| 9 | 2022-10-26 01:45 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | Anyrate, sorry for the goof, thanks for the catch. | |
| 127861653 by shinylman @ 2022-10-21 03:44 | 1 | 2022-10-21 14:30 | MikeN | Hi, Thank you for the city boundary update! The change looks good because I didn't see any shared boundaries. The old boundary relation and ways can be removed. It is generally better to edit objects rather than remove-replace, especially boundaries with shared edges. For those cases th... |
| 2 | 2022-10-21 23:47 | shinylman ♦4 | Thanks, I'll keep that in mind. | |
| 127754986 by zhyshi @ 2022-10-19 03:12 | 1 | 2022-10-19 11:32 | MikeN | Hi, what was the source of the name here? |
| 2 | 2022-10-20 01:18 | zhyshi ♦1 | From Google | |
| 3 | 2022-10-20 13:42 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,632 | Then please do not make such edits - copying from Google is not OK for many reasons (from legal to quality) | |
| 4 | 2022-10-20 20:19 | Allison P ♦1,136 | This is factually incorrect. Looking at the Greenville county assessor map this is not a legal road, just a service road. | |
| 125205663 by prettwd @ 2022-08-22 03:42 | 1 | 2022-08-22 12:20 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! Why was the driveway removed? |
| 2 | 2022-08-22 20:09 | Allison P ♦1,136 | Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125243471 | |
| 123586202 by BroGG21 @ 2022-07-14 02:25 | 1 | 2022-07-14 13:56 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! Please use meaningful changeset comments - "stuff" does not help other mappers understand what you are doing. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments |
| 123294379 by cmitchell @ 2022-07-06 21:46 | 1 | 2022-07-08 01:28 | MikeN | Thanks for the update - the lifecycle tag should include the former key also: abandoned:aeroway for this example. I have updated the abandoned features here. |
| 123062229 by cmitchell @ 2022-06-30 21:47 | 1 | 2022-07-06 02:05 | MikeN | Hi, the abandoned runway is probably best modeled with the lifecycle prefix so that it cannot be mistaken for a real runway. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:abandoned: |
| 122861535 by cmitchell @ 2022-06-26 09:48 | 1 | 2022-06-26 23:06 | MikeN | Hi, I believe TIGER is wrong here - the Greenville County GIS shows both the road and house addresses as just 'Packridge'. While GIS might be in error, the sign shows the same thing on Bing Streetview. |
| 122701228 by rsavoye @ 2022-06-22 09:00 | 1 | 2022-06-23 14:50 | wwunjo ♦10 | Hello savoye!I have reviewed your latest data sets, unfortunately they are duplicate roads which actually are existing on the OSM, you can track it by the moving any point in the place of your edits.Please revert your changes or let us revert them, to not create data issues in this region.Wi... |
| 2 | 2022-06-23 14:51 | wwunjo ♦10 | Hello savoye!I have reviewed your latest data sets, unfortunately they are duplicate roads which actually are existing on the OSM, you can track it by the moving any point in the place of your edits.Please revert your changes or let us revert them, to not create data issues in this region.Wi... | |
| 3 | 2022-06-24 08:17 | rsavoye ♦46 | If you had bothered to check, these are not duplicates, but different segments of the same highway. All I did was fix the tags. Who is "us" ? As a long time mapper in Colorado, telling me not to work on my own state is impolite. Threatening to revert changes is counter-productive, the usua... | |
| 4 | 2022-06-24 16:45 | MikeN | I would also like to have seen a less urgent note with more detail on first contact. But somehow there are duplicate ways such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1072223214 . I'm wondering if the upload happened at the exact instant of one of the network shutdowns or the DB re-index of ... | |
| 5 | 2022-06-25 02:02 | rsavoye ♦46 | Good catch! There are a bunch of other issues in this area, more than just CO 131 (which is a mess). This area hasn't seen much mapping activity, there are many per-exisiting issues beyond the tags I was fixing. As we use OSM for wildland fire fighting here in Colorado, fixing the issues is imp... | |
| 122742400 by himansne @ 2022-06-23 07:16 | 1 | 2022-06-23 11:49 | MikeN | Hi, what was the source for this change? ESRI (Clarity) shows the road close to TIGER, and nothing different shows on newer imagery. |
| 2 | 2022-06-23 12:14 | MikeN | Oops, my mistake - this edit is correct. Thank you. | |
| 3 | 2022-06-24 09:27 | himansne ♦5 | Hi,Thank you for reviewing the changeset.Happy Mapping!Regards,himansne | |
| 122138434 by MattTheDude @ 2022-06-08 22:42 | 1 | 2022-06-09 02:06 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! The default imagery (Bing) usually has an offset from the true GPS position. Check the background settings - usually the ESRI Imagery or ESRI Clarity layers have best alignment. Also, the building location should be aligned to the base of a building and not the roof. You can dr... |
| 121153027 by Anderson Co GIS @ 2022-05-18 15:20 | 1 | 2022-05-19 14:15 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for this update. It turns out that truck traffic access tagging in OSM is not done with a relation, but instead by hgv=no or hgv=delivery on the roads. The abbreviation hgv stands for heavy-weight-vehicle. |
| 120139005 by Trevor_1 @ 2022-04-24 21:02 | 1 | 2022-04-25 00:21 | MikeN | Hi, Was South Carolina road classification discussed anywhere? Roads probably will need to be aligned with the trending classification elsewhere, but let's get local editors on board first. We have lost good contributors in the past when someone else comes in with mass reclassification withou... |
| 2 | 2022-04-25 00:28 | Trevor_1 ♦270 | This wasn't really a "mass reclassification", I just changed a few roads to Tertiary. | |
| 3 | 2022-04-25 11:42 | MikeN | I'll let the editors I know who don't follow the mailing lists that systematic changes are coming so that they don't revert them. | |
| 4 | 2022-04-26 00:18 | Trevor_1 ♦270 | Ok thanks! | |
| 116276985 by MikeN @ 2022-01-18 01:14 | 1 | 2022-04-22 15:13 | SherbetS ♦155 | hello MikeN,on this objecthttps://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9426975000you used the tag man_made=communications_tower when in reality it is man_made=mast + tower:type=communication I understand that this is likely due to the confusing nature of the JOSM preset, but please use the corre... |
| 2 | 2022-04-22 18:50 | MikeN | In this case, I was going on the greater than 100 meters to decide to use tower. | |
| 3 | 2022-04-22 19:02 | SherbetS ♦155 | Its not a tower in the first place, and a communications tower is a special definition for structures almost exclusively built in europe | |
| 119645485 by BerriRoblx @ 2022-04-13 03:03 | 1 | 2022-04-13 18:39 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! Please use meaningful changeset comments - 'j' does not help other mappers understand what you are doing. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments |
| 119409881 by cooperisland @ 2022-04-07 04:15 | 1 | 2022-04-07 11:58 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! The type living_street is almost non-existent in the US. Residential roads are expected to have pedestrians and children playing in the street. |
| 118606622 by Sullivankingmortuary @ 2022-03-17 18:36 | 1 | 2022-03-17 19:45 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! Google Street View cannot be used as a source of POI information in OpenStreetMap. |
| 118112014 by eniiqma @ 2022-03-05 01:18 | 1 | 2022-03-05 20:00 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! The landuse is normally to an outline of the entire property. Also since this has been converted to residential, the current surrounding landuse would be residential. The building would remain industrial as built, even with residences. |
| 118079663 by SPECTRA995 @ 2022-03-04 06:25 | 1 | 2022-03-04 12:15 | MikeN | Hi, What is the source for previous name? TIGER is out of date. Both SC DOT and the Laurens County GIS show the new name. But I do see that the lower segment should have been split to remain the Torrington Heights name. |
| 2 | 2022-04-28 08:43 | SPECTRA995 ♦5 | Hi, MikeN! Sorry for the long wait. I used TIGER 2020 and I have studied the sources you wrote and you are right, they have more recent data. Thank you for writing about this issue and also for fixing this case. In the future, I will be more attentive to such edits. Thank you again. Kind regar... | |
| 109953044 by DeeeSeee @ 2021-08-19 20:20 | 1 | 2022-03-02 19:41 | txemt ♦70 | Why did you make Success Blvd a service road? |
| 2 | 2022-03-02 20:06 | DeeeSeee ♦1 | Because the primary buildings along that road are businesses or educational institutions (i.e. non-residential). I guess it could be classified as a "Minor/Unclassified Road". | |
| 3 | 2022-03-02 20:13 | txemt ♦70 | A service road isn't really a road for navigation. That's more inline with roads for parking lots, businesses, driveways, alleys, etc.I upgraded them to residential roads, as I'm not fan of unclassified roads. | |
| 4 | 2022-03-02 20:23 | DeeeSeee ♦1 | I can see your point that service roads aren't normally used for navigation, but it doesn't meet any part of the definition of a residential road (in a residential area, for access to a residential area, not normally used as through routes). | |
| 5 | 2022-03-02 20:25 | txemt ♦70 | I use residential road more as the lowest default of a road classification. Unclassified roads have slowly become obsolete in the US. | |
| 6 | 2022-03-03 11:54 | MikeN | There's been some discussion of eliminating one of the road categories in the US, but unclassified is still commonly used in industrial or sparsely populated areas | |
| 118027320 by txemt @ 2022-03-02 17:11 | 1 | 2022-03-02 19:53 | Spaghetti Monster🍝 ♦2,068 | Why are these roads deleted? If they are private or other classification just tag as such --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/118027320 |
| 2 | 2022-03-02 19:56 | txemt ♦70 | Most are non existent roads. | |
| 3 | 2022-03-02 20:20 | Spaghetti Monster🍝 ♦2,068 | If they exist as tracks shouldn't they be mapped as such? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrack --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/118027320 | |
| 4 | 2022-03-02 20:26 | txemt ♦70 | Those roads fit none of the description of use for those roads in the link you provided. These roads are on private ranch lands and serve 0 value to anyone except for the owner of the land.These roads do not have a connective network to anything outside of the fence line. There's no reason ... | |
| 5 | 2022-03-02 20:37 | MikeN | In some parts of the country, these private roads are useful as reference in fighting landscape fires or missing persons searches. | |
| 6 | 2022-03-02 20:39 | txemt ♦70 | Maybe in California, but not in Texas. | |
| 7 | 2022-03-02 21:51 | MoiraPrime ♦61 | Uhhh, I'm pretty sure removing valid data from the map is considered vandalism, no matter how "useful" you consider the data. | |
| 8 | 2022-03-02 21:54 | txemt ♦70 | It's not valid data. It's been there since the TIGER import. Valid data I'm deleting. If there's a valid reason for a road segment, I'm not deleting it. I'll look at it and maybe make a few minor changes, but I've been leaving valid stuff alone. | |
| 9 | 2022-03-02 22:14 | SherbetS ♦155 | If it exists in the real world, it's valid data. if the classification is wrong, the correct thing to do is update classification and add an access tag if you need to. | |
| 10 | 2022-03-02 22:16 | txemt ♦70 | A grain of sand exists in the real world. Do we map and tag that as well? | |
| 11 | 2022-03-02 23:52 | Trevor_1 ♦270 | Some of the Tiger roads should be deleted if they don't match the imagery at all, but if it's a driveway or a track road, then it should be reclassified. | |
| 117541438 by JPruitt10 @ 2022-02-17 23:20 | 1 | 2022-02-18 00:10 | MikeN | Hi, is Rawls Creek still a golf course, or is the conversion to park complete? |
| 117455183 by Ethan White of Cheriton @ 2022-02-15 23:54 | 1 | 2022-02-16 03:27 | MikeN | Please use meaningful changeset comments - “.” does not help other mappers understand what you are doing. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments |
| 117342134 by AverageOSMEditor @ 2022-02-13 05:00 | 1 | 2022-02-13 13:16 | MikeN | Please save changes made in one area before moving to a new area |
| 2 | 2022-05-01 18:32 | Trevor_1 ♦270 | Hi, is there a reason why you added this construction area? From the satellite imagery, it appears that it is already complete.https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1030838725 | |
| 117024373 by vijayhm @ 2022-02-04 22:16 | 1 | 2022-02-05 13:21 | MikeN | This changeset had review requested. Putnam and Baldwin county borders were broken when the county boundary was removed from Big Cedar creek. At times, water features are tied to administrative boundaries, so take care when removing those. |
| 117025650 by vijayhm @ 2022-02-04 22:51 | 1 | 2022-02-04 23:30 | MikeN | Please be careful when deleting objects. This change removed 9 counties in Georgia by breaking the admin boundary. |
| 116855545 by hasaan22 @ 2022-02-01 08:16 | 1 | 2022-02-01 23:53 | MikeN | Hi, this edit reactivated a node deleted from 15 years ago. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1344172/history |
| 2 | 2022-04-17 15:06 | LockOnGuy ♦772 | Hello hasaan22, Can you please specify the source of this import? You added lots of imports in Iran with non-used OSM tags like: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/964088/history Please take a look at: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines | |
| 116731192 by cfrazer66 @ 2022-01-29 05:34 | 1 | 2022-01-29 12:03 | MikeN | Hi, why are highways tagged as cart paths? |
| 2 | 2022-01-30 01:47 | cfrazer66 ♦1 | Thanks for pointing this out, done on accident while splining golf course. Thanks again and apologies. I have corrected the tags. | |
| 116683987 by Jeff50316 @ 2022-01-27 22:00 | 1 | 2022-01-28 01:39 | MikeN | Hi, why was the golf course deleted? |
| 116362851 by VLD191 @ 2022-01-19 23:50 | 1 | 2022-01-19 23:59 | MikeN | Hi, why is this marked as a level crossing, when the road section should be a bridge? (Or the railway section made into a tunnel) |
| 2 | 2022-01-20 18:24 | VLD191 ♦4 | Hello, I removed the level_crossing tag and made the road section a bridge, thanks for pointing this out. | |
| 115858567 by cmitchell @ 2022-01-07 01:03 | 1 | 2022-01-12 04:33 | MikeN | Hi, In this case, Bing had very old imagery. The entire site has been through construction for a year or so. In ID, the Maxar Premium imagery layer is often newer than Bing.I have restored it to the new parking lot layout. |
| 116005402 by roshanparajuli @ 2022-01-11 03:42 | 1 | 2022-01-11 12:43 | MikeN | Hi, why were address nodes removed? In OSM, it is not necessary to remove all nodes and convert them to areas, especially if a building contains multiple POIs. |
| 116006104 by roshanparajuli @ 2022-01-11 04:22 | 1 | 2022-01-11 12:41 | MikeN | Hi, why was this building removed? Hint: node information can be placed on multi-polygons instead of having to convert everything to a polygon. (If there aren't other POI nodes in the same building) |
| 116006710 by AverageOSMEditor @ 2022-01-11 04:50 | 1 | 2022-01-11 12:23 | MikeN | Hi, Please save changes in one area before moving to another area. |
| 116005194 by roshanparajuli @ 2022-01-11 03:29 | 1 | 2022-01-11 03:45 | MikeN | Hi, why were the address nodes removed? They are actually located in this building. |
| 115940326 by pabi12 @ 2022-01-09 12:40 | 1 | 2022-01-10 13:32 | MikeN | Hi, this change has removed the building tag from the museum, and broken the grass relation. |
| 2 | 2022-01-11 06:53 | pabi12 ♦24 | It will be reversed soon, thank you!! | |
| 115932092 by Jacorp @ 2022-01-09 07:34 | 1 | 2022-01-09 13:19 | MikeN | Hi, Please clarify the fixme - are you saying that the Greer city boundary is out of date and needs to be updated or is it admiration for the rats nest that resulted from the most aggressive annexation program in the region? |
| 2 | 2022-01-09 15:29 | Jacorp ♦5 | I'd say both. It cuts right through the Mitsubishi plant I was working on last night at a weird angle so it made it annoying to edit stuff. Also looks gerrymandered to all heck... | |
| 115756027 by T Fernandez @ 2022-01-04 13:48 | 1 | 2022-01-05 14:37 | MikeN | Hi, welcome to OSM! Since review was requested, I looked at this edit - thanks for adding surface tags where they are known. It was good that the street was split at the point where you know it to be unpaved. |
| 115787027 by Olya Popko @ 2022-01-05 09:12 | 1 | 2022-01-05 12:34 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for the update. Spartanburg county has open data and I believe TIGER is out of date for this road. I cannot find any trace of something called "South 903" in the county data. |
| 2 | 2022-01-05 13:36 | Olya Popko ♦2 | Hi! Thanks for your feedback. Could you please update the name of this road if you have local knowledge or another information? | |
| 3 | 2022-01-05 13:39 | Olya Popko ♦2 | Or should I need to rename this street to Catawba Road? | |
| 4 | 2022-01-05 13:59 | MikeN | Thanks, I updated it to the name in county records. | |
| 115336939 by AverageOSMEditor @ 2021-12-24 13:47 | 1 | 2021-12-24 15:50 | MikeN | Hi, please save edits from one region before moving on to another region. |
| 115012078 by COLA_MAP @ 2021-12-16 14:20 Active block | 1 | 2021-12-16 18:22 | TTPC_Checksum ♦6 | The driveway was already marked as private and does not connect to anything else. Routers will not send anyone down that driveway. But since the driveway is visible on imagery, it will be added again by someone else in the future. |
| 2 | 2021-12-16 19:32 | ZeLonewolf ♦557 | Please don't remove valid data. I've reverted this change. | |
| 3 | 2021-12-16 19:38 | COLA_MAP Active block | Comment not displayed. To view it, please select the "Include blocked users" option. | |
| 4 | 2021-12-16 20:26 | clay_c ♦489 | Sorry to inform you, but there's really nothing you can do about that. | |
| 5 | 2021-12-16 20:28 | COLA_MAP Active block | Comment not displayed. To view it, please select the "Include blocked users" option. | |
| 6 | 2021-12-16 20:32 | clay_c ♦489 | It could, but it'll simply be re-added shortly after by someone else. If you choose to keep deleting things that exist in the real world, like this driveway, you may lose your permission to edit again. | |
| 7 | 2021-12-16 20:41 | COLA_MAP Active block | Comment not displayed. To view it, please select the "Include blocked users" option. | |
| 8 | 2021-12-16 21:13 | MikeN | Are those delivery trucks, delivering a package to your door, or trucks trying to get to another location using your driveway? | |
| 9 | 2021-12-16 21:19 | COLA_MAP Active block | Comment not displayed. To view it, please select the "Include blocked users" option. | |
| 10 | 2021-12-16 21:34 | ZeLonewolf ♦557 | In OpenStreetMap, we map what is actually on the ground, not what people wish to have or not have on the map.See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice | |
| 11 | 2021-12-16 21:40 | COLA_MAP Active block | Comment not displayed. To view it, please select the "Include blocked users" option. | |
| 12 | 2021-12-16 22:27 | MikeN | It's unlikely that lack of a driveway in GPS would discourage such a truck driver from driving into the driveway anyway. | |
| 13 | 2021-12-17 13:17 | EP_Repair ♦561 | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 115054974 where the changeset comment is: revert deletions of driveway edits as per Ticket#2021121410000072, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5543 | |
| 114923575 by COLA_MAP @ 2021-12-14 12:50 Active block | 1 | 2021-12-14 13:38 | MikeN | Why did you remove these driveways? They all appeared to be tagged correctly. These driveways have a number of legitimate reasons for existing and thousands are being added to OSM everyday. They should not be removed unless they actually do not exist so this changeset will be reverted. Please read t... |
| 2 | 2021-12-17 13:17 | EP_Repair ♦561 | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 115054974 where the changeset comment is: revert deletions of driveway edits as per Ticket#2021121410000072, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5543 | |
| 114923645 by COLA_MAP @ 2021-12-14 12:52 Active block | 1 | 2021-12-14 13:38 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap! Why were these driveways deleted? Please use meaningful changeset comments - . does not help other mappers understand what you are doing. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments |
| 2 | 2021-12-17 13:17 | EP_Repair ♦561 | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 115054974 where the changeset comment is: revert deletions of driveway edits as per Ticket#2021121410000072, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5543 | |
| 114715077 by श्रीवत्स @ 2021-12-08 19:42 | 1 | 2021-12-09 12:53 | MikeN | Hi, it is a custom to improve objects that need improving rather than deleting and redrawing. In the process the addresses in this area have been deleted but there was nothing wrong with them. Buildings can be manually improved with JOSM's building tool plugin without removing the history. ... |
| 2 | 2021-12-09 13:12 | श्रीवत्स ♦2 | Hi Mike,"If you have access to a more accurate dataset with a suitable license, normally they are conflated into existing OSM objects with external tools." ... exactly this was done here, but the original building footprints have been severely broken. I've tried to fix them manual... | |
| 3 | 2021-12-10 00:13 | MikeN | The "Replace Geometry" plugin from utilsplugin2 is very helpful in this case for revising existing buildings from accurate data. | |
| 4 | 2021-12-10 04:20 | ZeLonewolf ♦557 | Do not delete features with the promise of future replacement. If you're going to replace objects, do it in a single changeset so that the data is never missing. This changeset needs to be reverted. | |
| 114713274 by श्रीवत्स @ 2021-12-08 18:34 | 1 | 2021-12-09 12:23 | MikeN | In the future, could you please confine your changesets to smaller areas (upload before moving to a new area). Thank you. |
| 114283020 by classik @ 2021-11-27 02:59 | 1 | 2021-11-27 03:08 | MikeN | Hi, you changed a state highway into a cart path, along with a number of other roads. Openstreetmap is used for navigation and this will disrupt other users. |
| 114196307 by はい！ @ 2021-11-24 20:25 | 1 | 2021-11-25 03:07 | MikeN | What was the reason for changing these road classification? It seems to be a different method than other local editors have used. |
| 113556018 by woodpeck_repair @ 2021-11-09 09:09 | 1 | 2021-11-18 03:56 | DUGA ♦548 | I edit a lot of places in this region and I don’t find anything worth using source tag. I did not drop this tag of the entire planet. Even if I did not drop them, I will do the same in smaller changesets eventually.I’d be happy to see if there is any complaint not from you because ob... |
| 2 | 2021-11-18 03:59 | DUGA ♦548 | Sorry for the weird auto completion here on the phone, please ignore the part “because obviously you can’t play”. | |
| 3 | 2021-11-18 09:42 | woodpeck ♦2,425 | DUGA, the DWG has received complaints about your deleting of these source tags, that's why we became active. It is possible that some source tags do not make sense and should be removed, however this is not for one individual mapper to decide; our mechanical edit policy says you need to discuss... | |
| 4 | 2021-11-18 12:22 | MikeN | I wasn't involved in the earlier complaints, but I agree with this revert and the mechanical edit rules. (even though I would personally want an editor flag that automatically removes 'source' on any edit I touch). | |
| 113903481 by Keegan Lee Swank @ 2021-11-17 15:39 | 1 | 2021-11-18 00:48 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! The node at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3779137058 was accidentally dragged. The editor has an Undo arrow in the upper right corner that can restore things if they are accidentally moved. Would you like me to fix this? |
| 113574073 by JackieMapping @ 2021-11-09 17:01 | 1 | 2021-11-09 21:14 | MikeN | Thank you for this edit. What was the intended change? It removed the building tag on the main office building and replaced it with landuse. The entire complex was already marked as 'Millenium Apartment Homes'. |
| 2 | 2021-11-09 21:24 | JackieMapping ♦2 | Thank you for your response. I was trying to show the area where the main building is like on Google Maps to be more specific for things that use OSM. I noticed the area around said Neighborhood. Perhaps it was unnecessary. Let me know if I should remove it or if you can update it, etc. | |
| 3 | 2021-11-09 21:24 | JackieMapping ♦2 | Perhaps my change was unecessary* | |
| 4 | 2021-11-09 22:01 | MikeN | I restored the building and marked it as type of office. It might be OK to add the building name such as rental office or club house; I'm not sure what its official name is. | |
| 5 | 2021-11-09 22:04 | JackieMapping ♦2 | Thank you for your assistance! | |
| 112793794 by mortensonfan @ 2021-10-21 13:47 Active block | 1 | 2021-10-21 13:49 | MikeN | These are fictional edits - please stop vandalizing the map, which many people are using |
| 111962804 by LuigiCotocea @ 2021-10-01 12:57 | 1 | 2021-10-02 02:02 | MikeN | Hi, welcome to OpenStreetMap! You're doing a great job adding local features. The subdivision tagging has evolved in the US. The most common method is to draw the residential land use outline, then add the name to the outline. If there is an original GNIS tag, it may be removed. The pla... |
| 109843870 by swebarla @ 2021-08-18 04:05 | 1 | 2021-08-18 19:34 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | Really expecting a way higher attention to detail from paid mappers here. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109843870 |
| 2 | 2021-08-19 11:00 | MikeN | I must be missing something, this looks like high quality work. | |
| 3 | 2021-08-19 13:32 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | If it weren't a paid mapper, I would agree. For a paid mapper, c'mon man, spend the time to not slapdash through it and go for precision. | |
| 4 | 2021-08-19 14:32 | MikeN | What specifically do you see that seems to be poor quality? From what I can see, it matches and exceeds quality I see from primary GIS sources. | |
| 109653854 by 123321bill123321 @ 2021-08-14 02:45 | 1 | 2021-08-14 11:51 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM. What is the source of this data? Please use meaningful changeset commentshttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments |
| 2 | 2021-08-14 12:25 | karson_ ♦146 | Surveying the data in these changesets, I found most of it to be outdated/inaccurate. Also, assuming all of these are quarries, they should have been tagged with landuse=quarry.Is this import documented somewhere? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha... | |
| 109523807 by JDS1919 @ 2021-08-11 15:15 | 1 | 2021-08-11 15:54 | MikeN | Hi, Please be careful when moving around the map. In this changeset, you dragged a node for hundreds of meters and disrupted a street shape. |
| 2 | 2021-08-11 16:06 | MikeN | By the way, welcome to OSM! I corrected the node. Let me know if you have any questions. | |
| 109485609 by rivermont @ 2021-08-10 21:58 | 1 | 2021-08-11 10:43 | MikeN | What was incorrect about the woods that had to be removed? They were not an import but handcrafted in the old world tradition. |
| 2 | 2021-08-11 12:37 | rivermont ♦221 | They hardly mapped onto reality at all. They cut out large portions of other woods, covered large areas of non-woods, and were only really handcrafted along two powerline cuts.I would leave it if someone was actively improving it but it would be hard to work with it since it was connected strangel... | |
| 3 | 2021-08-11 14:06 | MikeN | Thanks for redrawing this! I'm OK with deleting as part of an improvement project. After looking at the old wood boundary, it probably did need to be drawn with more detail. | |
| 108913300 by classik @ 2021-07-30 23:39 | 1 | 2021-07-31 00:28 | MikeN | Hi, these crossings do not look like a Ford where the road is under water - it should be a culvert. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/109660772 |
| 108684455 by pantus @ 2021-07-27 11:17 | 1 | 2021-07-27 23:08 | Allison P ♦1,136 | building=school is not appropriate for any buildings on university campuses. Please update with building=university at least, if you can't add a more detailed type. WISEM, for example, is building=detached |
| 2 | 2021-07-27 23:31 | MikeN | I understood the building=detached to be primarily single family dwelling. I'm not familiar with WISEM, but it doesn't seem to match. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Ddetached | |
| 3 | 2021-07-28 01:18 | Allison P ♦1,136 | That is correct. The building is a single-family home. It is no longer used for that purpose, but the building type hasn't changed. This is in line with the wiki page for buildings. | |
| 108006396 by roshanparajuli @ 2021-07-15 01:21 | 1 | 2021-07-15 01:29 | MikeN | Hi, Thank you for this edit. The building marked is actually the corporate shelter, not the amphitheatre which is located at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/666467876 |
| 2 | 2021-07-15 01:43 | roshanparajuli ♦10 | Thank you for the feedback, i have changed the feature type and marked the building as Corporate building. | |
| 107638503 by Window Withdraw @ 2021-07-08 13:05 | 1 | 2021-07-08 13:52 | MikeN | Hi, does this portion of Bear Rock Road really not exist, or is there just a barrier?Also, a previous user placed a barrier on Pinnacle Mountain Road, which doesn't show in Bing Streetview. |
| 71619669 by TheDude05 @ 2019-06-26 02:51 | 1 | 2020-01-19 18:05 | rivermont ♦221 | Hi,Did you document this import anywhere, and discuss it with the community? I can't find a page on the wiki for this TNRIS data.If not I would suggest that this data (all of it) be removed because it is VERY low quality, inconsistent, and just generally not good. |
| 2 | 2020-01-19 18:35 | TheDude05 ♦7 | It isn't an import, I made it. As for the quality it is derived from semi automated classification of aerial imagery with an infrared sensor by the organization in question which is distributed as a faster file under an open license. From that file I polygonized the different expertly classif... | |
| 3 | 2020-01-19 18:59 | rivermont ♦221 | > It isn't an import, I made it.> it is derived from semi automated classification of aerial imagery ... by the organization in question which is distributed as a faster file under an open license.You performed the processing that took it from one form to another, and then uploaded it... | |
| 4 | 2020-01-19 19:02 | rivermont ♦221 | Got scammed by formatting up there but hopefully it's still readable. :/I'm also not sure that this is even TNRIS data, as the landcover I can find on their data portal is NLCD data which is created by USGS (https://data.tnris.org/collection/89b4016e-d091-46f6-bd45-8d3bc154f1fc) | |
| 5 | 2020-01-19 19:11 | TheDude05 ♦7 | The data that has been uploaded is my data as it is in a completely different format than it was originally, even then I acknowledged the original dataset from which it was derived.As for spot checking it is a highly inaccurate way to see vegetation as your eye is not as sensitive as the sensor,... | |
| 6 | 2020-01-19 19:21 | TheDude05 ♦7 | True but as TNRIS is where I got it and they posted the license I give them the credit. | |
| 7 | 2021-06-21 23:14 | SomeoneElse ♦13,368 | For info this has just been mentioned again at https://osmus.slack.com/archives/CCJ2P6KCH , for much of the same reasons as discussed at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/71619765 including "doesn't seem to match what's actually there". I'm several thousand miles away... | |
| 8 | 2021-06-21 23:39 | TheDude05 ♦7 | I don't think anyone who has commented thus far has ever even been to this county so their ability to claim what is there or not is questionable at best. The dataset I derived this data from uses commonly accepted remote sensing practices to ascertain land cover. To take issue with it is to t... | |
| 9 | 2021-06-22 00:01 | rivermont ♦221 | This discussion has nothing to do with 'questioning practices in science,' and everything to do with data quality (and respect of the import process).These imported features are not connected and most importantly not bounded by anything representative of reality. They leave large gaps ... | |
| 10 | 2021-06-22 00:23 | TheDude05 ♦7 | It's a straw man to say that I have said someone had to have been to a place to map it. I have never said such a thing and it is disingenuous to say that I have. What I have said is that it is the practice of OSM to give precedent to those who are more local than those who are far away.As... | |
| 11 | 2021-06-22 01:08 | MikeN | I am also an 'outsider'. I prefer some types of automated data sources as a starting point. I have worked with traditional handcrafted OSM land uses (not created by me), as it is necessary to modify for landscape changes. Here I looked in several random areas of the county comparing... | |
| 12 | 2021-06-22 01:39 | rivermont ♦221 | Not sure what the 'personal aesthetic preference' comment is intended for; it seems more of an ad-hom than anything I put forward. I have laid out reasons that this imported data is of low quality but you seem to ignore this by saying it was 'done by professionals' which is neith... | |
| 13 | 2021-06-22 02:01 | TheDude05 ♦7 | The powers that be that I referenced is the DWG, especially since someone from the DWG had commented here. As for personal aesthetic that comment was directed at large since many comments have been about how it looks rather than any other objective criteria. My comment about professionals is a reb... | |
| 14 | 2021-06-22 02:03 | TheDude05 ♦7 | I apologize for typos, my baby is trying to type for me. | |
| 105313862 by dela1274 @ 2021-05-25 20:04 | 1 | 2021-05-26 00:26 | MikeN | Please don't delete sections of the lake: the entire reservoir has disappeared. |
| 104437027 by Gittings Global @ 2021-05-10 09:11 | 1 | 2021-05-10 11:37 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! I have delete your SEO SPAM (This is not Houston TX). If this is an error, you can report it here, then we will be happy to help restore the data. |
| 104154354 by Riyana_Shrestha @ 2021-05-05 03:58 | 1 | 2021-05-06 22:09 | MikeN | Hi, why was the current Highlander Hotel overwritten with the older Main Street Inn name which is closed now? Your information source is out of date. |
| 2 | 2021-05-07 08:13 | Riyana_Shrestha ♦23 | I have taken this information from BIng, and the building is still "Main Street Inn" which is not closed either, while searched now as well. | |
| 3 | 2021-05-07 11:38 | MikeN | The top Bing search result leads to a parked web site. The old "Main street inn" Facebook page was last updated in 2018. https://www.facebook.com/Main-Street-Inn-54515823197 The Highlander Mountain House began in 2020 https://www.facebook.com/TheRuffedGrouse | |
| 4 | 2021-05-07 12:52 | Riyana_Shrestha ♦23 | The name of the hotel has been changed and the tags have been removed. Thankyou | |
| 5 | 2021-05-07 13:10 | SomeoneElse ♦13,368 | @Riyana_Shrestha What was your original data source? | |
| 6 | 2021-05-07 13:50 | MikeN | Thank you - I have also restored the address since the new business is still at the same location. | |
| 7 | 2021-05-10 07:24 | Riyana_Shrestha ♦23 | @ SomeoneElse: Our main source was BIng but as referred by one of the OSM team we will be taking information from Esri, Mapbox, and Maxar. Which would be better in your view? Can you share with us. | |
| 98017373 by amarajz @ 2021-01-23 12:03 | 1 | 2021-05-03 11:53 | MikeN | Hi, why were these streets set to private? There are no gates shown on Bing Street view. There is a "private subdivision" sign, but the sign does not say "private, keep out". Most subdivisions could be described as private. |
| 2 | 2021-05-04 05:37 | amarajz ♦15 | Hi,There is a gate at other end, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6536980167 and a private community sign board at John Dodd Road intersection. Considering these facts, combined with our driver feedback we have made roads as private. Please let us know otherwise, we will make changes accordin... | |
| 103813766 by boopington @ 2021-04-29 05:27 | 1 | 2021-04-29 12:17 | MikeN | Hi, Why was the new Popeyes restaurant and the driveways around it removed? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/571503782/history Why was the new building at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/907190790/history removed? |
| 2 | 2021-04-29 21:52 | boopington ♦66 | the Popeyes is new? how can that be when its shape and driveways are on the older imagery? | |
| 3 | 2021-04-30 00:56 | MikeN | Yes, the new Popeyes was built in the same location as the old building that was torn down. The old building was a reasonable approximation for the new building until new imagery is available. Someone had already added the new driveways for the new configuration which don't match the old driv... | |
| 4 | 2021-04-30 13:07 | itsamap! ♦13 | It's therehttps://www.popeyes.com/store-locator/store/restaurant_239841 | |
| 103842465 by Riyana_Shrestha @ 2021-04-29 11:49 | 1 | 2021-04-29 14:52 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for this edit. Everything is good so far but there are 2 things that can be improved: 1. Add building=yes tag since it's a structure that you can walk into. 2. Press the Q button to square the corners since it's a rectangular building. |
| 2 | 2021-04-30 05:24 | Riyana_Shrestha ♦23 | Will be working that way, thanks mate. | |
| 77129003 by maxolasersquad @ 2019-11-15 13:31 | 1 | 2021-04-28 19:06 | DUGA ♦548 | The point of adding "surface=paved" is almost none here. The tag is vague. |
| 2 | 2021-04-28 19:23 | maxolasersquad ♦92 | The surface tag was created to be used by those who wish to use it. I hardly see any harm in marking if a surface is paved or not. Some navigational apps, like OsmAnd, allow navigation to avoid unpaved roads. By denoting which roads are paved or not paved allows consumers to make decisions like this... | |
| 3 | 2021-04-28 19:49 | MikeN | surface=paved gives assurance to road bikers that they will not be riding on gravel. And being non-specific about the type of material leaves it open for later mappers who know the specific material type to update. | |
| 4 | 2021-04-28 19:54 | DUGA ♦548 | Yes some can also claim that adding tons of “”surface=paved” to every Federal Highway/State Route/National Highway will be helpful to the project, I can’t even oppose to that idea, but I feel sorry if that really happens. | |
| 98800841 by boopington @ 2021-02-06 05:34 | 1 | 2021-02-06 14:14 | MikeN | Hi, why was the construction area at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/587482738/history removed? Why was the placeholder at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/860352915/history removed? Those are useful markers to prevent roads from 'growing back' when mappers use Bing imagery only. |
| 2 | 2021-02-06 22:58 | boopington ♦66 | ....because it appears done? | |
| 3 | 2021-02-07 13:16 | MikeN | Construction is not complete just because building outlines appear. They were still working on the site when I drove by it a week ago. Even the sales web site has only virtual tours and no actual photos of the place yet. | |
| 4 | 2021-02-07 19:18 | boopington ♦66 | building outlines? 2 of them literally had landscaping on the imagery and marked pavement. | |
| 5 | 2021-02-07 20:40 | MikeN | The construction zone was the red line in the linked photo. Any shadows are from neighboring trees. It's difficult to declare construction complete from only aerial imagery. Maxar Premium (latest): https://greenvilleopenmap.info/oneTwentyOne.JPG | |
| 6 | 2021-02-07 21:50 | boopington ♦66 | im talking about the grass not trees. | |
| 7 | 2021-02-07 22:04 | MikeN | Not sure where you're looking, but there's only dirt and construction equipment pictured in the construction zone. | |
| 8 | 2021-02-08 01:28 | boopington ♦66 | is there not grass around the southern building? | |
| 9 | 2021-02-08 11:50 | MikeN | That is the trees in the neighboring parcel. The point is that a construction zone shouldn't be deleted until it is obvious that it is finished. And often they shouldn't be deleted but moved to the next step in the OSM lifecycle - such as residential, commercial, or retail. | |
| 10 | 2021-03-24 15:30 | MikeN | Hi, the way at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/913785031#map=19/34.80470/-82.28467 has magically reappeared as expected. It is very helpful to retain ways tagged with demolished:highway until the default Bing imagery catches up. | |
| 101492031 by Riyana_Shrestha @ 2021-03-22 09:57 | 1 | 2021-03-22 11:13 | MikeN | Hi, Why was this changed to Richmond but is really in another city? Why was address and extended tagging information removed? |
| 101047454 by stephencarrollcg @ 2021-03-15 11:27 | 1 | 2021-03-15 12:06 | MikeN | Hi, This area is undergoing construction and does not match the latest imagery.Please use meaningful changeset comments - your name does not help other mappers understand what you are doing. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments |
| 2 | 2021-03-16 10:23 | stephencarrollcg ♦1 | I can leave better comments, that's fine. However, I am routing for driver navigation and we have gps data that a driver drove the roads that I was trying to put together. 1. where cannons Campground Road meets Overbrook Drive. 2 Overpass doesn't match satellite data and driver drove over ... | |
| 3 | 2021-03-16 12:05 | MikeN | Thanks for the explanation. I reverted because some of the roads were crossing without junctions - that won't help navigation either. The original OSM editor who created these roads under construction set them as their final configuration, rather than reflecting their current state. I have ... | |
| 100233976 by cbhackmeyer @ 2021-03-01 23:04 | 1 | 2021-03-02 00:00 | MikeN | Hi, Great work in Greenwood! These buildings with inner courtyards are the trickiest parts to get right. There's still a technical problem in that the outer parts of the multipolygons share ways, which is not allowed - therefore might not render correctly or at all. I don't know the e... |
| 2 | 2021-03-02 06:34 | cbhackmeyer ♦6 | Thanks for the feedback and the iD "Merge" tip; I didn't know it would make multipolygon relations for you like that. I understand what you're saying, and looking at OSMI I can see these are flagged as errors. I can't find anything in the wiki that actually says shared segme... | |
| 3 | 2021-03-04 06:34 | cbhackmeyer ♦6 | I believe this issue has now been resolved by changeset 100393750. Thanks again for the feedback! | |
| 100122344 by jmorse012 @ 2021-02-28 03:57 | 1 | 2021-02-28 12:50 | MikeN | Hi, Why did you delete so many residential roads and buildings and destroy the geometry of Cleghorn Mill Road? |
| 99933079 by Shashank Saraogi @ 2021-02-24 22:23 | 1 | 2021-02-28 10:28 | fiscal ♦23 | Hi Shashank,don't they learn to straighten buildings (press key "Q") at Amazon? |
| 2 | 2021-02-28 11:33 | MikeN | Hi fiscal, Does the straighten buildings function properly handle the 45 degree corner in the upper left? | |
| 3 | 2021-03-01 02:32 | Allison P ♦1,136 | No need for snark, fiscal — though Amazon edits are generally not of great quality, that's on the company for not properly training employees.MikeN, I had no trouble cleaning up the building shape using the orthogonalize shape tool in iD. I fixed it in https://www.openstreetmap.org/ch... | |
| 4 | 2021-03-02 07:34 | Shashank Saraogi ♦3 | Hi All,Thanks for the feedback and fixing the building outline. I was not completely familiar with the editing process and experimented on adding building information. Going forward I will make sure to orthogonalize the building outlines before saving them to OSM.Regards,Shashank | |
| 99762594 by Texas Special @ 2021-02-22 17:25 | 1 | 2021-02-22 22:22 | MikeN | Hi, Welcome to OSM! By removing the leisure=park tag, you removed Keowee Park from the map. I have restored it by adding the protect_class tag. |
| 94402350 by emiliovigil826 @ 2020-11-19 01:29 | 1 | 2021-02-17 12:22 | MikeN | Hi, the roads on the upper deck are not bus lanes, but just a standard parking deck. I have corrected this. |
| 2 | 2021-02-17 13:05 | MikeN | Please correct your program BusLanes, as this is the second time it has made this same mistake. | |
| 94328842 by naresksv @ 2020-11-18 05:35 | 1 | 2021-01-22 00:27 | MikeN | Hi, thanks for these edits. When West Georgia Road was moved back to the line of the abandoned highway, that was mis-aligning it to the old imagery. Note the new alignment now visible on Maxar Premium. |
| 2 | 2021-01-22 10:07 | naresksv ♦5 | Hi, Thank you for reviewing the edit, Apologies for the wrong edit, I've missed to check the latest imagery. I've made the necessary changes in the changeset(# 97964816). Looking forward to learn more from you. Regards, naresksv. | |
| 97924090 by Penguii @ 2021-01-21 19:17 | 1 | 2021-01-21 22:52 | MikeN | Hi, welcome to OSM! Why were the driveway service entrances to 7-Eleven removed? Why was the fuel location moved from the gas pump area onto the building? |
| 97726019 by TheRealDaymill @ 2021-01-18 23:58 | 1 | 2021-01-19 00:05 | MikeN | Please use meaningful changeset comments - 'No one cares' does not help other mappers understand what you are doing. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments |
| 2 | 2021-01-19 12:05 | skquinn ♦804 | Actually, yes, people do care, and you are not helping them by writing blatant rubbish for changeset comments. Also, this is way too big of an area for one changeset (9 US states as well as a huge chunk of Mexico and Cuba). | |
| 96695951 by Desgagnés @ 2020-12-31 00:21 | 1 | 2020-12-31 12:39 | MikeN | Hi, welcome to OSM! The protect_class was missing on Table Rock State Park after converting tag from leisure=park - I have added it. |
| 96552435 by JTP302 @ 2020-12-28 17:57 | 1 | 2020-12-28 18:13 | MikeN | Thanks for your contributions to OSM. Please note that street name abbreviations should be expanded. Here's the Wiki page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Abbreviation_.28don.27t_do_it.29 |
| 96120577 by gaaus @ 2020-12-19 19:59 | 1 | 2020-12-27 17:13 | MikeN | Hi, why was the road changed to dual carriageway? There are only painted lines in the street. |
| 95508642 by RollTideRoll_asdfjkll @ 2020-12-08 19:48 | 1 | 2020-12-17 20:30 | Betanyahoo ♦18 | Why are you edit-warring against the general consensus amongst the US community? |
| 2 | 2020-12-17 20:57 | MikeN | One reason for this change might have been that the previous edit was missing the protect_class, which results in the feature not showing at all. | |
| 3 | 2020-12-17 21:13 | RollTideRoll_asdfjkll ♦30 | That is correct, though other areas have the nature reserve tag also attached (for example see a few state parks in FL). for Red Mountain the park is owned by a nonprofit and not by the state. For state parks it should be like this https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9517835#map=15/34.7274/-86.50... | |
| 95754589 by woodpeck_repair @ 2020-12-13 13:18 | 1 | 2020-12-13 14:30 | jeremiah-england ♦2 | I think this bot reverted my edit here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95755441I'm not sure why it got flagged. It wasn't AI generated. Maybe because I used JOSM's circle tool to fix a existing shape? |
| 2 | 2020-12-13 14:56 | jeremiah-england ♦2 | Actually, when I download from that location in josm again, it looks like the data is still there. It's just taking a while to render I think. | |
| 3 | 2020-12-13 15:37 | MikeN | Hi, I believe this is an inconvenient feature of the OSM history display. Any large changeset having a bounding rectangle covering a small area will show in the history tab. Then to see if the large changeset affected the area of interest, the OSMCHA tool must be used. I think OSMCHA also has... | |
| 4 | 2020-12-13 15:50 | MikeN | And you're right - the data is still there. The data can render within a minute, but may be delayed by minutes or hours depending on system load. | |
| 5 | 2020-12-13 15:52 | jeremiah-england ♦2 | Thanks @MikeN! I just looked into the OSMCha. You can filter chansets by bounding box area size, that way avoiding large ones as you suggested. | |
| 94733051 by boopington @ 2020-11-24 22:44 | 1 | 2020-11-26 13:34 | MikeN | Hi, why was https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/766912500 removed? |
| 94799189 by Rahjerd @ 2020-11-25 21:34 | 1 | 2020-11-26 00:21 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! When an object needs to be improved, it is better to just directly edit the object rather than to delete and replace by something else such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/676937274 . This retains the history as a recommended best practice. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wik... |
| 94024548 by lbrewst2 @ 2020-11-13 00:43 | 1 | 2020-11-13 13:21 | MikeN | Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap! When improving the shape of things, it is best to adjust the outline rather than deleting and redrawing. For example in this case the address was deleted along with the object history. I restored the address. Also houses look much better with square corners. Yo... |
| 87218007 by Saratoga Springs @ 2020-06-27 05:02 | 1 | 2020-11-06 17:47 | MikeN | Hi, does this building match the sat imagery? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/820094049 |
| 92189505 by fsSnowboard @ 2020-10-08 17:46 | 1 | 2020-10-09 00:27 | MikeN | Hi, welcome to OSM! Normally the school name is added to a building only if the building is the entire school. In this case, the school name is already on the surrounding school ground area, and can even make the name appear twice at certain zoom levels. |
| 2 | 2020-10-09 16:48 | fsSnowboard ♦1 | Hey, thanks for the information. I reverted the change. I'm looking forward to contributing to the map in the area. | |
| 92197747 by westsider28 @ 2020-10-08 22:04 | 1 | 2020-10-09 00:24 | MikeN | Hi, Some times it is better to change the old roads to lines with the tag demolished:highway or abandoned:highway to keep it from 'growing back' from projects that detect missing roads. |
| 91534262 by MauiEngTech @ 2020-09-25 23:29 | 1 | 2020-09-26 07:16 | pitscheplatsch ♦5,393 | Hi MauiEngTech, welcome to OSM.May we know the reason behind deleting several mapped drive ways? Thanks.See https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=91534262If a way is not accessible to the public, add the access=private or access=no and don't delete the way.---Detect... |
| 2 | 2020-09-28 21:00 | MauiEngTech ♦1 | the driveways i deleted were either private gated driveways and do not have public access or were not driveways in the first place, a couple of them were just dirt access roads on private land for farming. Your comment about not deleting driveways just changing the access to no or private. First... | |
| 3 | 2020-09-29 00:14 | MikeN | Hi MauiEngTech, Thanks for your reply!My driveway is already mapped for the entire world to see. And that is a minor privacy issue considering that Bing and Google have a full street view of my house along with the address. Since driveways are easily verifiable features, they can be added to... | |
| 91255294 by MakeItBetter @ 2020-09-22 02:20 | 1 | 2020-09-22 02:38 | MikeN | Hi, these subdivisions were not tagged as place=suburb , but instead using the suggested place=neighborhood. Why were the place tags removed? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Neighbourhood |
| 2 | 2020-09-22 03:02 | MakeItBetter ♦12 | A convention for subdivisions I've observed is to mark them as residential areas instead of the larger neighborhoods of a city/town to avoid confusion. | |
| 3 | 2020-09-22 11:33 | MikeN | These subdivisions are already marked inside a landuse area and there is no ambiguity about where the place tag applies. There are many thousands of such subdivisions already tagged this way in OSM. Nodes marked as 'place' however do introduce name association in other unincorporated ... | |
| 4 | 2020-09-22 18:42 | MakeItBetter ♦12 | Planned subdivisions are very different from suburbs and neighborhoods. There is not yet a place=subdivision, and as such should forego a place marker (see apartment complex example on this page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dresidential). While there are other subdivisions lab... | |
| 5 | 2020-09-22 22:18 | Minh Nguyen ♦565 | Named landuse=residential areas are the best way to map these residential developments, since they have well-defined boundaries and usually well-known names and are predominately given over to a single kind of land use.However, I’m not sure I’d go so far as to say place=neighbourhood... | |
| 6 | 2020-09-23 02:09 | MikeN | There is a mix of opinions - more discussion at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2020-September/020621.html | |
| 7 | 2020-09-23 23:52 | MikeN | Some OSM tags go in a direction that doesn't correspond to any usage elsewhere. For example, there is not a 1:1 translation from the US Highway Functional Classification system and the OSM highway tagging conventions. place=neighborhood seems to be such a tag. I'd recommend not removi... | |
| 8 | 2020-09-23 23:55 | MakeItBetter ♦12 | Thank you all for the discussion. I believe it could be helpful to add place=subdivision or even US versions/definitions. | |
| 90996858 by Feathered Mapper @ 2020-09-16 16:02 | 1 | 2020-09-16 23:38 | MikeN | Hi, I jumped the gun and changed this to Rueben's before the actual changeover which will happen on September 22. I haven't worried too much about being too early because the OSM map and OSMand are the only apps that update instantly. Most OSM map consumers only update between monthly... |
| 2 | 2020-09-16 23:38 | MikeN | https://www.facebook.com/Reubenswings/ | |
| 3 | 2020-09-17 00:57 | Feathered Mapper ♦1 | Thanks for letting me know MikeN! | |
| 90888853 by emiliovigil826 @ 2020-09-14 23:30 | 1 | 2020-09-15 11:25 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for this edit. The building is more than a bit confusing: bus depot on the bottom floor and a parking area for cars on the roof. I'll try to update it to better match what is on the ground. |
| 90864638 by thelidarking @ 2020-09-14 11:53 Active block | 1 | 2020-09-14 12:18 | MikeN | Again, please do not delete the lake waterbody to create a golf course |
| 90835133 by thelidarking @ 2020-09-14 01:37 Active block | 1 | 2020-09-14 01:45 | MikeN | Why do you keep deleting Lake Keowee? If you don't recognize something, please don't delete it. |
| 90821669 by thelidarking @ 2020-09-13 14:36 Active block | 1 | 2020-09-13 18:49 | MikeN | Hi, Please take care before deleting objects. This change appears to have broken both Lake Keowee and Keowee-Toxaway State park. |
| 90806513 by srs42006 @ 2020-09-12 22:52 | 1 | 2020-09-13 00:23 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! Please use meaningful changeset comments: - does not help other mappers understand what you are doing. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments |
| 89600836 by Feathered Mapper @ 2020-08-19 01:49 | 1 | 2020-08-19 02:55 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap! The turning circle for Crimson Court was accidentally dragged to Batesville road, so I restored it. |
| 89005302 by tduncan2 @ 2020-08-06 00:55 | 1 | 2020-08-06 01:02 | tduncan2 ♦1 | I'm new to this open street map editing, I see my comments are truncated, There appear to be problems with the software showing warnings about non-existent overlaps. I would like to know how to get rid of previous edits by others that show far less precision than my own ballpark digitization. |
| 2 | 2020-08-06 11:25 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! The reason for many of the warnings were that the large landuse area (residential) was changed to building=apartments. Also, buildings do not need a name 'apartment' since the building type has been set to 'apartments' | |
| 3 | 2020-08-06 11:28 | MikeN | The best way to add details to a building is not to delete the previous building because it may already contain much information such as address or 3D tagging. Instead, grab the middle of a wall where more detail is needed and drag it to match the imagery. Repeat until the new building feature i... | |
| 86826371 by itsamap! @ 2020-06-18 12:45 | 1 | 2020-06-19 11:08 | MikeN | Hi, This Joe's Crab Shack has closed and all signage removed. |
| 2 | 2020-06-19 11:12 | MikeN | Also, Red Bowl was set to layer -1: is it in the basement? | |
| 82342328 by Arvind Kartik @ 2020-03-18 10:09 | 1 | 2020-06-16 20:47 | DaxServer ♦115 | Hi Arvind. I believe you have unintentionally removed the TIGER tags. Can you please add them back. More info here: https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/21849142If you need help, let me know. |
| 2 | 2020-06-16 21:11 | MikeN | Hi @Srihari Thalla , I believe those TIGER tags were automatically removed by the editor, as the community decided they were no longer needed. | |
| 3 | 2020-06-16 21:49 | DaxServer ♦115 | Hi Mike. I wasn't aware. Thanks! | |
| 86242531 by HuskyTango @ 2020-06-05 11:36 | 1 | 2020-06-05 12:39 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! Are you familiar with this area today? There is newer imagery - check the "Background settings" , then check the "National Agriculture Imagery program". The original edits were recently put it by a local mapper. Would you like us to restore the original... |
| 86148870 by agft4271 @ 2020-06-03 18:10 | 1 | 2020-06-03 20:14 | MikeN | Hi, great progress in Shelby! Normally in OSM, land uses are not connected directly to roads because they do not extend to the centerline of the highway. In some areas there may be a gap between the edge of land use and road in the default map rendering, but this is only because road widths are n... |
| 85696544 by boopington @ 2020-05-24 22:36 | 1 | 2020-05-25 11:36 | MikeN | What was being cleaned up? Some of the deleted ways appear to be confirmed by recent surveys. Also, keeping demolished:highway tags for an imagery cycle helps keep armchair mappers from re-adding ways from imagery. |
| 2 | 2020-05-25 20:49 | boopington ♦66 | Surveys? It sure didnt seem like it considering a few of the things i deleted were roads that have been removed for development, besides i would hope everyone should know to check all imagery layers before adding something. | |
| 3 | 2020-05-26 00:31 | MikeN | The typical use of demolished:highway is when construction moves faster than the newest imagery is updated - checking all imagery layers won't help in that case. I did see one with a check date of 2020-03-15, I'm not sure how significant that was if it was in the middle of a new developme... | |
| 4 | 2020-05-26 02:08 | boopington ♦66 | Ok, so once there IS a new imagery layer that shows it is indeed gone, shouldnt you be able to delete it then? | |
| 5 | 2020-05-26 12:33 | MikeN | Yes, it may be deleted when the default imagery layer is updated - depending on whether the date the imagery was taken is newer than the last edit date of the object being deleted. I've gotten GPS coordinates of a road inside a construction area and used that to create a street under construc... | |
| 85475989 by AverageOSMEditor @ 2020-05-20 05:40 | 1 | 2020-05-20 11:21 | MikeN | Hi, Please save changes made in one area before switching to a new area to avoid creating huge changesets that span the country. |
| 85149551 by illia h @ 2020-05-13 13:58 Active block | 1 | 2020-05-13 14:52 | MikeN | Please use meaningful changeset comments - “2141” does not help other mappers understand what you are doing. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments |
| 85149431 by illia h @ 2020-05-13 13:56 Active block | 1 | 2020-05-13 14:51 | MikeN | Please use meaningful changeset comments - “12345365” does not help other mappers understand what you are doing. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments |
| 84924895 by AverageOSMEditor @ 2020-05-09 04:34 | 1 | 2020-05-09 11:41 | MikeN | Please save changes before moving to a new area to avoid making changesets that span the country. |
| 84722375 by AverageOSMEditor @ 2020-05-06 00:37 | 1 | 2020-05-06 02:21 | MikeN | Please save / upload before moving to a new area to avoid creating a changeset that spans multiple states. |
| 84289681 by Bynum Aesthetic Dentistry: Matthew J Bynum DDS @ 2020-04-28 20:16 | 1 | 2020-04-28 22:26 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! I have delete your SEO SPAM (mostly no standard keys, no verifiable data or not positive verifiable address data). If this is an error, you can report it here, then we will be happy to help restore the data. For the most information in the description we have own keys. Please have lo... |
| 83384802 by rjalen2004 @ 2020-04-10 23:11 | 1 | 2020-04-20 00:23 | MikeN | Hi, please be careful when editing boundaries. This change set accidentally renamed the entire state of South Carolina to Indian Land. Someone else has since corrected it. |
| 83727158 by Francisco77 @ 2020-04-17 21:49 | 1 | 2020-04-18 11:36 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap! Although Bing imagery is the newest, it usually has an offset from GPS. ESRI Clarity (Beta) usually has a much better alignment. Before you move a lot of streets you may want to make sure your background satellite imagery is lined up with the existing streets in the nei... |
| 82759685 by Innoventions @ 2020-03-28 17:37 | 1 | 2020-03-28 18:05 | MikeN | Please upload data before moving to a new area to avoid creating changesets that span the country. |
| 82735637 by Innoventions @ 2020-03-27 22:37 | 1 | 2020-03-28 00:43 | MikeN | Please save data before moving on to a new area to avoid creating changesets that span the country. |
| 82687843 by Innoventions @ 2020-03-27 01:53 | 1 | 2020-03-27 02:01 | MikeN | Someone has Mapillary footage of the Titanic site now? |
| 2 | 2024-04-13 12:31 | Taya_S ♦978 | I have some concerns about the source of this edit. You added details to the wreck such as railings, gates, the mast and more. What source did you use to map the titanic like that? | |
| 3 | 2024-04-19 12:12 | Taya_S ♦978 | Reverted due to lack of response and impossible sourcehttps://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150220864 | |
| 82229897 by Innoventions @ 2020-03-15 23:03 | 1 | 2020-03-15 23:30 | MikeN | Please save / upload changes in one area before moving to a new area to avoid changesets that span the ocean. |
| 2 | 2020-03-16 02:42 | S-zation ♦108 | Also, please make meaningful changeset comments. Random numbers aren't helping anyone when they review your edits.https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments | |
| 81912365 by itsamap! @ 2020-03-08 00:43 | 1 | 2020-03-08 02:46 | MikeN | This one ended up in the parking lot! Perhaps Gather Greenville should be added as an alternate name to Gather Gvl (which is the name they go by)? |
| 81705618 by AverageOSMEditor @ 2020-03-03 03:14 | 1 | 2020-03-03 03:29 | MikeN | Please upload an area before moving onto another area to avoid giant changesets that span half the country. |
| 79242713 by gollabg @ 2020-01-06 10:18 | 1 | 2020-02-28 01:45 | MikeN | Hi, why was Lake Cunningham Road set to oneway? |
| 2 | 2020-02-28 10:34 | gollabg ♦3 | Hi MikeN,Apologies for the error here . While editing this road, I was simultaneously editing another road in a different area and had accidentally assigned direction to this part of the road. I have corrected the edit under Changeset #81580074Thanks again for identifying and letting me know. ... | |
| 80968215 by catskill @ 2020-02-13 16:55 | 1 | 2020-02-14 02:41 | MikeN | Hi, thanks for adding the buildings! Normally the building will not have a name unless it is special, such as the "Keowee Care Admin Building" or the name is posted on the building itself. If these are different neighborhoods, an area is drawn around the neighborhood and the entire subd... |
| 80602462 by Jeff50316 @ 2020-02-05 17:56 | 1 | 2020-02-05 19:12 | MikeN | Hi, it's generally better to just move or re-shape items rather than delete and redraw them. |
| 80501723 by AverageOSMEditor @ 2020-02-03 23:34 | 1 | 2020-02-04 00:38 | MikeN | Hi , why were all these roads changed to trunk? |
| 79615503 by Jeff50316 @ 2020-01-15 17:10 | 1 | 2020-01-28 23:39 | MikeN | Restored accidental golf course deletion in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/80223042 |
| 80166705 by pbudhara @ 2020-01-28 01:52 | 1 | 2020-01-28 02:14 | MikeN | Hi, why were the turn restrictions created? There is no divider median. In South Carolina, it is allowed to turn across the double yellow , unlike some other states. It only separates traffic directions. |
| 2 | 2020-01-29 03:43 | pbudhara ♦2 | Hi,Thanks for reviewing the edit. Apologies for the mistake here. I have corrected it under the changeset #80228093.Looking forward to learning from you.Regards,pbudhara. | |
| 80150775 by AverageOSMEditor @ 2020-01-27 15:19 | 1 | 2020-01-27 15:45 | MikeN | Hi, please save changes before moving to a new area: these changes span half the country |
| 2 | 2020-01-27 19:51 | skquinn ♦804 | Also, it is misleading to have a changeset tagged as "Edits around DFW" when there are edits clearly hundreds of miles away. (It would also help to have a more specific changeset comment; really, the bounding box is supposed to tell us it's "around DFW" on its own.) | |
| 80141784 by Sampool15 @ 2020-01-27 12:22 | 1 | 2020-01-27 12:24 | MikeN | Hi, what does 'ligma chi" mean? |
| 80056515 by Sampool15 @ 2020-01-25 01:16 | 1 | 2020-01-25 01:38 | MikeN | Hi, how does 'ye' describe the changes here? |
| 76908331 by vvvnm @ 2019-11-11 12:42 | 1 | 2020-01-23 12:44 | MikeN | Why were these turn restrictions added? The road is not divided here. In South Carolina, there is no restriction about turning across the double-yellow line; it only separates direction of traffic travel. |
| 2 | 2020-01-24 09:08 | vvvnm ♦1 | Hi,Thank you for keeping us posted about the area. We have corrected this under changeset #80020031. We are always happy to engage with the OSM community and learn from them.Regards,vvvnm. | |
| 79467435 by i02much @ 2020-01-12 05:24 | 1 | 2020-01-12 15:50 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! Something to be aware of when aligning roads - the default image Bing usually has a significant alignment error. When aligning roads, select the "Background Layers", then use the older but better aligned "ESRI World Imagery (Clarity) Beta) layer |
| 77270228 by nbhiss @ 2019-11-19 11:08 | 1 | 2020-01-11 12:27 | MikeN | Hi, why were these turn restrictions added? There are no physical dividers between lanes. In South Carolina, turns are allowed across a double yellow line - double yellow only separates traffic travel directions here. |
| 2 | 2020-01-13 04:41 | nbhiss ♦4 | Hi MikeN,Thanks for your response. Apologies for the incorrect edit of adding turn restrictions, have corrected them under changeset #79496165Looking forward to learning from you.Thanks,nbhiss. | |
| 78700775 by TZLNCTV @ 2019-12-20 22:21 | 1 | 2019-12-20 23:34 | MikeN | Why are all these roads being promoted to higher classes? For example, this trunk road that has a 15mph speed limit and speed bumps? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/37602777 |
| 2 | 2019-12-23 13:50 | MikeN | Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/78776466 | |
| 78743178 by AverageOSMEditor @ 2019-12-22 20:00 | 1 | 2019-12-22 20:56 | MikeN | What is the source for the construction project on Future Green River Blvd? None of this shows on 2019 imagery. |
| 78729468 by AverageOSMEditor @ 2019-12-22 09:28 | 1 | 2019-12-22 12:54 | MikeN | Please add a better description of changes. Save more often before moving to a new area so that one changeset doesn't cover half the state. What is your source for US800? |
| 2 | 2019-12-22 12:55 | MikeN | Why was Outback deleted and redrawn? | |
| 78703515 by AverageOSMEditor @ 2019-12-21 02:22 | 1 | 2019-12-21 03:13 | MikeN | Why were some buildings deleted and redrawn? |
| 78273447 by OpenStreetUser1130 @ 2019-12-11 17:22 | 1 | 2019-12-12 00:35 | MikeN | Residential driveways are normally mapped as highway=service / service=driveway instead of residential |
| 78272407 by OpenStreetUser1130 @ 2019-12-11 16:52 | 1 | 2019-12-12 00:29 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM. Something to consider: instead of deleting an existing road to add detail or a name, improve the existing road. It's helpful to have a historical record of changes like that and the name will not be lost. Thanks! |
| 76569890 by Adamant1 @ 2019-11-04 05:39 | 1 | 2019-11-13 22:01 | UAN51 ♦15 | Volunteer responding - GNIS tags MUST be preserved! |
| 2 | 2019-11-14 08:12 | Adamant1 ♦222 | Really? Why's that? Show me anywhere in the OSM guidelines where it says GIS "MUST!Q!!!!!!@#!#$@$" be PRESERVED!!@!!!!!!. People delete them in all kinds of situations all the time (for instance with TIGER imported roads). As they are essentially useless and just make it harder for pe... | |
| 3 | 2019-11-15 11:42 | freebeer ♦1,598 | adman, calm down and lay off the methanol. unlike the 20 to 30 per day fortified added-sugar beers i've resorted to for lack of good Reinheitsgebot beverages, i'm sure it can't be good for you.TIGER roads probably do not have GNIS data. tiger was an import with a lot of question... | |
| 4 | 2019-11-17 17:08 | SomeoneElse ♦13,368 | Hello, Andy from OSM's Data Working Group here. Echoing freebeer's comments it'd be great if everyone could calm down a bit. Firstly, the historical tags on objects can be seen at http://osm.mapki.com/history/way.php?id=283793237 . In this case someone expolicitly added them in... | |
| 5 | 2019-11-17 21:25 | UAN51 ♦15 | Well, here's the wiki page about GNIS https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/USGS_GNIS and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/Data"The Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) is the authoritative database on place names. The tags may possibly be imprecise in position, so... | |
| 6 | 2019-11-17 21:37 | Adamant1 ♦222 | Sorry for the heatedness on my side. It just seems like there's been an almost constant onslaught of people taking issue with things that aren't issues in an extremely passive aggressive manor. Which has just put me on edge. In this case use of capitals and exclamation marks in UAN51'... | |
| 7 | 2019-12-05 02:58 | Adamant1 ♦222 | A few thoughts about the GNIS thing now that I have looked into is that the only reason given for why we shouldn't delete GNIS tags is because "GNIS if possibly the only database in the US to share work from OSM." I'd say 1. In both instances of that being mentioned the sent... | |
| 8 | 2019-12-05 04:08 | MikeN | There was some talk of exchanging GNIS updates with OSM, but once the current OSM license terms solidified, it's clear that it would not be within the OSM data license terms. | |
| 9 | 2019-12-05 05:16 | Adamant1 ♦222 | Thanks for the information. That's what I figured. | |
| 10 | 2019-12-08 00:28 | UAN51 ♦15 | Anywhere on the wiki or someplace that discuss about removal of GNIS? I'm only seeing wiki pages that says to keep them. | |
| 11 | 2019-12-08 03:00 | Adamant1 ♦222 | I don't think there has to be. The responsibility is on you to justify why the tags shouldn't be deleted. As Andy said, "If anyone has a particular reason to keep tags like "gnis:created" around then please do explain that, and link to where it was discussed with the communi... | |
| 12 | 2019-12-08 03:27 | Adamant1 ♦222 | UAN51, go to https://taghistory.raifer.tech/ and look at the tagging history for gnis:feature_id, etc. All of them where added in a single import in 2009, which contentious at the time and still is, and they have all been on a steady decline since then. The use of gnis:state_id has gone down by almo... | |
| 13 | 2019-12-08 19:21 | Minh Nguyen ♦565 | The gnis:feature_id tag and its synonyms are also documented at <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:gnis:feature_id>. Unlike many other import tags, gnis:feature_id contains a stable external identifier. In that sense, it’s quite like a Wikidata QID, except that it’s the U.S. ... | |
| 14 | 2019-12-08 19:27 | Minh Nguyen ♦565 | * virtually all parks in GNIS, that is | |
| 15 | 2019-12-09 00:16 | Adamant1 ♦222 | I appreciate you bringing that up. I didn't know it was an option. I have zero problem with converting them to QIDs where I can going forward. I only delete them in extremely rare cases anyway. I can't remember why I did here. I probably would have been cool with UAN51 just adding them bac... | |
| 16 | 2019-12-09 00:21 | Adamant1 ♦222 | I had actually suggested we take it to the tagging mailing list to get it clarified better, but UAN51 said not to because it was "personal" and that he didn't want other people getting involved in it. So I never did. Looking back I probably should have though. | |
| 17 | 2019-12-09 04:05 | UAN51 ♦15 | Calm down Adamant1. I'm only doing what the Wiki says. If you actually clicked and read the links I sent above, you should have seen the part where it says "he tags may possibly be imprecise in position, so GNIS-tagged features should be corrected for position and especially name, keeping ... | |
| 18 | 2019-12-09 05:47 | Adamant1 ♦222 | Obviously I read the wiki pages because I directly quoted them multiple times. Its cool though. I know the whole "well, you just must not of read it" or whatever similar argument is a pretty popular refrain on here when people are disagreed with. So, I'll give you a pass on it. We... | |
| 19 | 2019-12-09 05:54 | Adamant1 ♦222 | Hhhmm, it seems this park doesn't have a QID. Bummer. Oh well. It's not like it's in my state anyway. I don't want the locals here to go off me for editing things where I don't live anyway. "shrug." Maybe someone who cares about it and lives here can create one for... | |
| 20 | 2019-12-09 06:53 | Minh Nguyen ♦565 | There’s nothing inherently wrong with contributing in an area where you don’t live or haven’t visited lately. That’s called armchair editing and I’m guiltier of it than anyone in this thread.Once you get comfortable enough with OSM, you should feel free to fix what ... | |
| 21 | 2019-12-09 07:07 | Adamant1 ♦222 | Minh, I did do a search for it on Wikidata. I thought that entry was for a different park though. My bad. Thanks for adding it. | |
| 77609840 by kshtdh @ 2019-11-27 07:11 | 1 | 2019-12-02 00:03 | MikeN | Hi, what is the reason for adding the turn restrictions? There is no divided median here. |
| 2 | 2019-12-02 10:09 | kshtdh ♦3 | Hi,Thanks for the comment, Apologies for the mistake. I have removed the turn restrictions under changeset # 77811707. I will keep in mind to have such errors checked hereafter.Regards,kshtdh | |
| 77774664 by Jeff50316 @ 2019-12-01 07:37 | 1 | 2019-12-01 13:06 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap! Great job on detail so far. There were a number of roads deleted here also. Normally existing items are changed slightly when adding detail rather than delete and redraw. OSM is used for navigation apps, so the deleted roads can cause interruption to routing. |
| 77438781 by polak3011 @ 2019-11-22 17:14 | 1 | 2019-11-29 21:58 | MikeN | Hi, please use a more descriptive comment - 'update' describes every edit in OpenStreetMap. Why were the objects deleted? Also the land use https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/735350936 crosses over itself. |
| 77449045 by sympodial @ 2019-11-23 00:36 | 1 | 2019-11-23 13:02 | MikeN | Nice job mapping this from GPS traces! |
| 77241757 by Acollicus10 @ 2019-11-18 18:03 | 1 | 2019-11-18 22:28 | MikeN | Hi, thanks for your contribution! This supermarket does not qualify as a park in OpenStreetMap and the park has been removed. Only map real objects in OSM - see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dpark |
| 77196076 by robersonj2 @ 2019-11-17 18:18 | 1 | 2019-11-17 21:32 | MikeN | Hi, great job on the bridge - that was correct. An option to add more information to the bridge would be to set the surface as metal instead of just paved. |
| 77114678 by Daria_P @ 2019-11-15 09:18 Active block | 1 | 2019-11-15 12:40 | MikeN | Your vandalism deleted sequential OSM ID node numbers |
| 2 | 2019-11-15 13:20 | iandees ♦723 | Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/77128310 --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/77114678 | |
| 77067178 by accheela @ 2019-11-14 10:55 | 1 | 2019-11-14 11:46 | MikeN | Hi, in South Carolina there is no restriction about turning across double yellow lines, unlike some other states. Double yellow lines only separate opposing directions of traffic. |
| 2 | 2019-11-18 11:51 | accheela ♦1 | Hi Mike,Thanks for your input. As per your suggestion I've edited the turn restriction accordingly under the changeset #77224175Regards,accheela. | |
| 76960592 by Merckle @ 2019-11-12 12:47 | 1 | 2019-11-12 18:34 | MikeN | Hi, I noticed that the speed limits weren't marked past that intersection, and I found a message that the Tesla navigator could get confused when speed limit markings disappear suddenly. I've added the speed limits according to the SCDOT. I don't know how long it will take to upda... |
| 76929635 by Merckle @ 2019-11-11 20:51 | 1 | 2019-11-12 01:09 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap! The default Bing imagery is usually the newest, however it may have a large offset. For example, in the Background Settings, compare with 'ESRI World Imagery Clarity (Beta)' , which is older but much closer to reality. Also, the usual convention is that land use... |
| 76654730 by rsperanza @ 2019-11-05 14:59 | 1 | 2019-11-05 20:37 | MikeN | Thanks for adding these parking aisles - lots of great detail. But perhaps more detail than needed - the usual OSM convention is that 1-way paths are needed only if there is a physical divider. In this case for example, a Tesla trying to find the best route might have to take a longer path around ... |
| 2 | 2019-11-05 21:19 | rsperanza ♦1 | Hi, thanks for catching this! I made this and then discussed with a friend and decided I did it wrong. I would like to know the correct way to map it. Thanks! | |
| 3 | 2019-11-05 22:38 | MikeN | I think I have fixed the routing. The convention is to use plain service roads for entrances, and parking aisles inside the lot. I did split the entrances into 1-way because it looked like there was a divider on the aerial image and Bing StreetView. That will direct drivers entering McDonald&#... | |
| 4 | 2019-11-06 00:26 | bhousel ♦278 | Hey MikeN and mechrock - thanks for adding all these parking details to the map. As a rule of thumb, we often recommend using the `highway=service` roads to create a "skeleton" throughout the parking lot - the roads entering/exiting and main roads (e.g. where a truck may go), and usin... | |
| 5 | 2019-11-06 01:23 | rsperanza ♦1 | I really do appreciate the feed back! I have a couple questions though. For parking lots and the area feature, do you draw the area of the entire lot or each individual section like I have currently? Actually I see you edited it to the entire lot, is there a time when you wouldn't do this? As f... | |
| 6 | 2019-11-06 01:50 | MikeN | Re: Parking lots - either way is acceptable. Individual parking areas are drawn when micro-mapping. A single large area is less cluttered on the map display. The landscaped islands and dividers could be drawn either way. For buildings - if a building houses a single POI such as Harris Teeter... | |
| 7 | 2019-11-06 02:48 | bhousel ♦278 | Agree with MikeN that either way of doing parking lots is acceptable, however consider that each polygon will probably be rendered with a "P" in the center, so I try to just join them together and not make too many of them.Re: Harris Teeter, I personally prefer mapping all businesses a... | |
| 8 | 2019-11-06 03:05 | rsperanza ♦1 | Thanks again guys, super helpful and appreciated! | |
| 75920786 by AverageOSMEditor @ 2019-10-19 06:20 | 1 | 2019-10-19 11:18 | MikeN | Hi, are all these roads really under construction? This lists Bing as a source, but none of them are visible on Bing. Do you have a source for these new roads? |
| 75484580 by westsider28 @ 2019-10-09 22:20 | 1 | 2019-10-10 11:40 | MikeN | Please explain the errors that required deleting. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dresidential |
| 75350277 by njARC_19 @ 2019-10-06 20:19 | 1 | 2019-10-07 01:10 | MikeN | Hi, Thanks for the addition. Normally, land use polygons are not tied to road centerlines in OSM because they do not extend to the center of the road. In addition, tying them together makes future roadway changes more difficult. The gap that was between the land use and road way is partly a rende... |
| 74824627 by AverageOSMEditor @ 2019-09-23 19:43 | 1 | 2019-09-24 00:05 | MikeN | Hi, I noticed that Hyatt Street has been changed to a dual carriageway below I85, while the Mapillary and aerial images show only a 5 lane road. Normally we map as a separated dual carriageway in OpenStreetMap only if there is a physical divider. |
| 74454678 by seabluesky @ 2019-09-13 20:40 | 1 | 2019-09-13 21:47 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for the update. What type of road closure is this, and how long will it be closed? |
| 2 | 2019-09-16 13:24 | seabluesky ♦1 | Normally I wouldn't put in construction notices, but this has been up for a year already and no repairs are in the works so it appears to have a semi-permanent status. | |
| 73720563 by payelgh @ 2019-08-25 15:48 | 1 | 2019-08-25 22:56 | MikeN | Hi, Why were these turn restrictions added? I don't see any concrete divider. |
| 2 | 2019-08-27 12:28 | payelgh ♦15 | Hi MikeN,I added the restriction based on the pair of double solid line which is a legal/painted median. If this is not a valid call, please let us know your suggestion. Eager to learn from you.Regards,payelgh | |
| 3 | 2019-08-27 17:58 | MikeN | Hi, South Carolina is different from some other states and Double Yellow lines here only indicate divided traffic flow and passing is not allowed. They are not prohibited to cross when turning. | |
| 4 | 2019-08-28 14:19 | payelgh ♦15 | Hi MikeN,Thanks for your update. I have reverted the Restriction – Chageset # - “ 73844746“. I will also pass on this input to my team regarding adding restrictions in South Carolina based on double solid yellow lines. Please let us know any other suggestions you have.Regar... | |
| 73695071 by SamB3 @ 2019-08-24 12:13 | 1 | 2019-08-24 18:10 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap! The editor shows Bing imagery because it is usually the newest , however it is often mis-aligned. The reference would be GPS traces, but there are none in this area. A better source is fom the background settings, choose "ESRI World Imagery (Clarity) Beta" to... |
| 73694652 by SamB3 @ 2019-08-24 11:48 | 1 | 2019-08-24 15:47 | user_5359 ♦19,375 | Welcome to OSM! Welcome to OSM! Don't add any private information from residential or owner to a residential building! |
| 2 | 2019-08-24 16:43 | SamB3 ♦1 | Did I add something I shouldn't have? Thought I just added street number. | |
| 3 | 2019-08-24 18:06 | MikeN | The information that you added was OK, but the convention is to use a more specific address format as this number was changed to. Also instead of a description of "Home", the building type would be set to house | |
| 73278789 by MCTrans @ 2019-08-12 18:13 | 1 | 2019-08-13 01:11 | MikeN | Hi, Why were these sections of West Faris Road and Grove road changed to type Service? They are multi-lane traffic routes. |
| 73138090 by riysingh @ 2019-08-08 06:53 | 1 | 2019-08-08 13:32 | MikeN | Hi, these turn restrictions can be more simply represented with a 1-way - I updated as 1-way. |
| 2 | 2019-08-12 13:42 | riysingh ♦29 | Hi MikeN,Thanks for your suggestion. Will follow such tips for my future edits. Regards,Riysingh. | |
| 72643101 by lordfarquaad @ 2019-07-25 12:35 | 1 | 2019-07-26 12:20 | MikeN | Hi, great job mapping Geneseo! Hint - for square buildings like Leaman's , use the Q key with the building selected to make square corners. |
| 72202058 by upstatesc88 @ 2019-07-13 04:15 | 1 | 2019-07-13 11:38 | MikeN | These look great also. |
| 72202049 by upstatesc88 @ 2019-07-13 04:14 | 1 | 2019-07-13 11:37 | MikeN | These look great. Happy mapping! |
| 72119974 by upstatesc88 @ 2019-07-11 06:11 | 1 | 2019-07-11 11:01 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap! The apartment complex has been created as one large building - normally the entire apartment grounds are created as Landuse - residential , and each apartment building is traced separately as an apartment building when adding more detail. |
| 2 | 2019-07-13 04:11 | upstatesc88 ♦2 | I see! Thank you for pointing me in the direction of the proper formatting. | |
| 71170176 by Oksana C @ 2019-06-12 08:18 Active block | 1 | 2019-06-12 11:46 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for this edit. It looks like the Graceland East multi-polygon was broken. |
| 70423234 by MikeN @ 2019-05-20 01:05 | 1 | 2019-05-20 01:06 | MikeN | Corrects Zig Zags from changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/69329913 |
| 70405476 by Lucila Silbermann @ 2019-05-19 09:44 Active block | 1 | 2019-05-19 13:36 | MikeN | Hi, This area has been identified as one large building. Is that what was intended? |
| 70270196 by Lucila Silbermann @ 2019-05-15 11:07 Active block | 1 | 2019-05-15 11:18 | MikeN | Hi,This area has been added as one large building. Is this what was intended? |
| 70187308 by Alisa Stefanovitch @ 2019-05-13 11:16 Active block | 1 | 2019-05-13 11:34 | MikeN | Hi, you have drawn the area as one large building. Is this what you meant to do? |
| 69329913 by mapman44 @ 2019-04-18 04:39 | 1 | 2019-04-22 15:36 | MikeN | Hi, please be careful when dragging an entire way to re-verify all nodes along its length. In this case, someone else wrongly connected power lines to roads, and as a result this road was distorted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/109712420#map=19/34.55825/-82.46793 . |
| 68930387 by Timothy Smith @ 2019-04-05 17:22 | 1 | 2019-04-07 11:04 | MikeN | This change has mis-identified the Pot Belly Deli, which is associated with the national chain PotBelly Sandwich works. I have restored that restaurant and put the local web site link |
| 68049513 by shadty @ 2019-03-12 06:18 | 1 | 2019-03-28 15:57 | MikeN | Hi, for all these turn restrictions - there are no signs that disallow the turns, and even the police frequently turn left through these intersections. If this was based on the double yellow lines - South Carolina does not disallow turns across double yellow - they only prohibit passing. A recen... |
| 2 | 2019-04-01 10:56 | jguthula ♦65 | Hi MikeN,Thanks for looking into this edit. The editor added turn restrictions in this case because of double yellow lines. We didn't know this rule is not applicable in South Carolina. Will do more research on South Carolina traffic rules and update our workflows accordingly. Will update m... | |
| 68598241 by Vv_osm @ 2019-03-27 18:33 | 1 | 2019-03-27 23:15 | MikeN | Looks good - both ends were connected, which allows routers to find it. There was an extra segment that I removed, and I changed the highway type to service so that routers would not give it preference over regular roads. |
| 68597246 by Vv_osm @ 2019-03-27 18:10 | 1 | 2019-03-27 18:30 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap! We can't use Google to validate street names because of copyright issues, but I did verify with TIGER that this edit was correct. |
| 2 | 2019-03-27 18:46 | Vv_osm ♦1 | Thanks! I'm looking forward to mapping my city. It is quite fun and easy to do so. | |
| 68303059 by Timothy Smith @ 2019-03-19 17:18 | 1 | 2019-03-19 17:38 | MikeN | Hi, why were the address nodes removed? We were in the process of combining them with the stores. |
| 67152910 by itsamap! @ 2019-02-13 06:34 | 1 | 2019-02-13 22:10 | MikeN | Keep in mind that these will show up as version conflicts when we try to apply addresses. |
| 2 | 2019-02-13 23:25 | itsamap! ♦13 | OK good to know I will hold off on these kinds of edits until we finish the import. | |
| 66835797 by Blue Ridge Family Chiropractic @ 2019-02-01 15:06 | 1 | 2019-02-01 19:22 | MikeN | Thank you for the update - The original location should have been correct instead of this new location in the parking lot. A search also seems to find the right shopping center - https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=blue%20ridge%20family%20chiropractic#map=19/34.92941/-82.29311 |
| 2 | 2019-02-04 22:26 | Blue Ridge Family Chiropractic ♦1 | Maybe so, but the marker ends up looking like it's down Saint Mark Road (which is very close to my competition. I pay a lot for expensive Wade Hampton rent and would like the marker to show that my location is directly on Wade Hampton Blvd. | |
| 66640482 by kwametedros @ 2019-01-25 18:47 | 1 | 2019-01-25 20:21 | MikeN | Hi, thanks for the update. The west part of Airport road has been decommissioned for the runway extension. Also in most areas, the latest Bing imagery is shifted by an average of 5 meters from GPS center lines. So existing roads should not be realigned unless using GPS/Mapillary tracks as a ... |
| 65775967 by ekkakkas @ 2018-12-26 07:13 | 1 | 2019-01-21 12:25 | MikeN | Hi, It turns out that these are really just oneway roads, set only by "do not enter" signs instead of the unusual one-way arrows. I marked them as oneway along with the oneway alley next to this road to remove the need for the turn restrictions. |
| 2 | 2019-07-10 05:07 | ekkakkas ♦3 | Hi,Thanks for reviewing the edit and apologies for the delayed response. I added turn restrictions as there is just a 'do not enter ' board. But in this area as you mentioned only 'do not enter' boards are present. Thanks for making the changes that was really helpful.\... | |
| 66298496 by hkkollip @ 2019-01-14 11:27 | 1 | 2019-01-14 12:29 | MikeN | Hi, South Carolina allows turns across double yellow lines. Normally they do place a break in double yellow lines for intersections, but not this one.I don't know the story on why this intersection has no break, but normally they would add signs for a turn restriction. |
| 2 | 2019-07-10 11:19 | hkkollip ♦9 | Hi, Thanks for looking into the edit and apologies for the delayed response. I have removed the turn restrictions as per your suggestion.Regards,hkkollip | |
| 66175578 by westsider28 @ 2019-01-09 21:01 | 1 | 2019-01-09 22:52 | MikeN | Hi, I usually leave the outline and change torn down buildings as demolished:building = yes until the imagery catches up. Otherwise other guest mappers may come along later and the building is re-added if there are no other clues like a construction zone or replacement features. |
| 2 | 2019-01-09 22:55 | MikeN | Also, we're planning a building + address import project later this year that you're welcome to join. It uses existing OSM buildings as much as possible, just attaching the address for single-address buildings. | |
| 65673510 by Jim Schuuz @ 2018-12-21 16:21 | 1 | 2018-12-21 18:56 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap! Thanks for adding this - the school name was already on the larger school grounds. The general OSM convention is to place the name on the larger object so it will display earlier when the map is zoomed out. Adding the name to the building also can cause the name to di... |
| 2 | 2018-12-22 01:44 | Jim Schuuz ♦1 | Thanks, it wasn't showing under any zoom level that I could see in my browser. I'll look more closely next time. I'm still getting used to this mapping system. | |
| 65595052 by dmouhama @ 2018-12-18 22:22 | 1 | 2018-12-19 01:27 | MikeN | The sections you have identified as toll do not actually require any toll to travel on - a vehicle might choose to exit before any toll booth. Why were these marked? |
| 2 | 2018-12-19 01:34 | dmouhama ♦6 | The entrance into the the Highway showed toll road at the sign on Bing Streetside.https://www.bing.com/maps?cp=34.794342~-82.438734&lvl=17&dir=200.965&style=x&v=2&sV=1 | |
| 3 | 2018-12-19 01:52 | MikeN | There's a sign there, but the OSM convention is "Only portions of way from which there is no "escape" except for a U-turn should be marked as toll. " , and in this case there's an exit to 153 without any toll. The other sections are similar. | |
| 4 | 2018-12-19 01:52 | MikeN | https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:toll | |
| 5 | 2019-07-10 08:55 | yaswap ♦68 | Hi, Thanks for the updates and apologies for the delayed response. yaswap on behalf of dmouhama(inactive user) | |
| 65455925 by WonderWoman1 @ 2018-12-13 21:52 | 1 | 2018-12-13 23:53 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap! The address information normally has the house number listed separately from the street. I separated the address parts and placed them on a new node away from the edge of the property. |
| 65283272 by Steve Hollingsworth @ 2018-12-08 00:43 | 1 | 2018-12-08 12:48 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetmap! I was able to merge the nodes and connect the streets into one line. I saw a larger road off to the left and drew it as a driveway. Does it have a name? I couldn't tell from the latest TIGER roads layer. |
| 2 | 2018-12-08 17:01 | Steve Hollingsworth ♦1 | Oh, I see! I'm sorry but I hadn't looked down the mountain. The buildings at the top and area surrounding is the campus of The Mountain Retreat and Learning Center where I volunteer and I had just been concerned with that.Now that you draw my attention to the base, I see another error.... | |
| 3 | 2018-12-08 17:16 | Steve Hollingsworth ♦1 | I believe I have the roads I know labeled suitably now. | |
| 4 | 2018-12-08 20:38 | MikeN | Excellent - and now with your local knowledge, it will direct people to turn in the right place from Dillard Road. | |
| 64693070 by oanac2_telenav @ 2018-11-20 11:38 | 1 | 2018-11-20 12:03 | Spanholz ♦398 | Hey, can you have a look at the State Line Road here. If I compare all the satellite layers I think thee northern part is not connected with the Freeway anymore but ends with a turning circle.Thanks Spanholz |
| 2 | 2018-11-20 13:44 | oanac2_telenav ♦9 | Hello Spanholz, are you sure? If you look at Mapbox and Digital Globe Premium (zoom in) the roads are connected and from what I've looked around the satellite imagery seems to be more recent. Also, if you take a look on Mapillary street view, on the track that comes from North and is most recen... | |
| 3 | 2018-11-20 13:59 | iandees ♦723 | If you look at the county's GIS page (https://rutherfordcounty.connectgis.com/Map.aspx) they have aerial imagery from 2010 and 2015. The 2010 imagery shows the street connected to US 221 and 2015 has it disconnected. | |
| 4 | 2018-11-20 14:13 | MikeN | In this case, Bing and USGS are the most recent imagery and the road is disconnected. | |
| 5 | 2018-11-20 14:18 | oanac2_telenav ♦9 | Ok, I will leave it disconnected, but just to be sure a survey might be needed. Thank you all for the intervention. | |
| 6 | 2018-11-20 14:18 | MikeN | The road seen on Mapillary is in a different location (halfway between the old State Line road and the new State Line Road intersection.) | |
| 7 | 2018-11-20 14:25 | oanac2_telenav ♦9 | I am currently working on adding road name from Tiger 2018 in Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson metro-area, you seem to have more knowledge than me, can anyone make any recommendations on the satellite imagery I should use, which is more up-to-date? thx | |
| 8 | 2018-11-20 14:48 | MikeN | The answer to latest imagery used to be easy, but with more sources this becomes complicated. In this case, Digital Globe Premium also had the latest when zoomed out.Bing has the most recent update in the city of Greenville. In the surrounding areas, the Mapbox-enhanced and Digital Globe will... | |
| 64534762 by cyncar @ 2018-11-15 15:54 | 1 | 2018-11-15 17:22 | MikeN | Hi, existing roads do not need to have new roads added on top of them. I have removed the extra streets. |
| 64532959 by cyncar @ 2018-11-15 15:03 | 1 | 2018-11-15 16:03 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap! Please be careful when editing - the nodes of some streets were dragged and disrupted street routing. Existing baseball fields do not need to be retraced. Adding a name "baseball field" is not necessary since existing tags already identify it as a baseball fi... |
| 64255463 by tuepedia @ 2018-11-07 08:59 Active block | 1 | 2018-11-07 13:32 | MikeN | Hi, this appears to be a mistake. It only adds an operator to a node on the street. I cannot find any records of a company nearby. |
| 2 | 2018-11-07 14:17 | freebeer ♦1,598 | Worse, it appears this edit was intended for somewhere in germany, probably Tuebingen given the search hits for the applied name, the username and created_by field, and use of the word Geschaeft.Not sure if this is an application bug, or what... But looking at the most recent changeset, there is ... | |
| 3 | 2018-12-10 08:28 | freebeer ♦1,598 | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 65335626 where the changeset comment is: undo buggy addition of unrelated tagging nodes worldwide intended for polygons in Tuebingen germany via a defective gateway | |
| 63775937 by ashedold @ 2018-10-23 00:06 | 1 | 2018-10-23 19:45 | MikeN | Thank you for adding these. Although the towers here were added correctly as manmade structures, the normal convention is to just mark them as power=tower , with no more detail. For the line itself, power=line is fine, and you may add more information if known: such as operator (often Duke Energ... |
| 2 | 2018-10-23 19:59 | ashedold ♦1 | Gotcha. Thanks! | |
| 63544663 by itsamap! @ 2018-10-15 14:27 | 1 | 2018-10-21 18:10 | MikeN | When the Wells Fargo, BB&T, and Publix were converted to Multipolygons, they became invalid Multipolygons with touching outer edges. I converted them back to buildings because it stopped the MS building analysis. |
| 58994725 by MikeN @ 2018-05-15 18:55 | 1 | 2018-10-16 14:27 | GerdP ♦2,751 | Hi MikeN!I found a few ways with the unusual tag highway=demolished. This may also mean something like "bad surface" . Please use one of the lifecycle prefixes instead so that the status is clearer. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix |
| 2 | 2018-10-16 16:16 | MikeN | Thanks - I've updated these to lifecycle prefix. | |
| 3 | 2018-10-16 17:04 | GerdP ♦2,751 | Thanks for the quick response :-) | |
| 63447732 by Magick93 @ 2018-10-12 09:19 | 1 | 2018-10-12 11:00 | MikeN | This road is private, has no road signs, and already marked as noname=yes. Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/63451112 |
| 62311816 by twhims @ 2018-09-05 13:22 | 1 | 2018-09-05 22:08 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap! Thank you for the edit - I noticed that there were some duplicate entries for the park, so I merged them and changed the name back from 'South Carolina' to 'South Carolina Botanical Garden'. |
| 62209005 by MikeN @ 2018-09-02 00:20 | 1 | 2018-09-02 00:21 | MikeN | Also update road geometries per survey |
| 61901852 by RD1 @ 2018-08-22 20:53 | 1 | 2018-08-23 01:35 | MikeN | Hi, Please add a meaningful comment to the changeset that explains the goal of the edit. It seems that some of these edits have lost information such as road name, lanes, etc. |
| 61631661 by TheBestIdea @ 2018-08-13 16:09 | 1 | 2018-08-13 17:26 | jmapb ♦404 | There are dozens of these around Brooklyn and Queens, all added by homeslice60148 and tagged with #maproulette and #Long_Island_traffic_lights_(Brooklyn,_Queens) Aside from the facts that 1) they're generally not in places where sidewalk mapping makes any difference to pedestrian routing, a... |
| 2 | 2018-08-14 14:52 | TheBestIdea ♦110 | My personal preference is that, in NYC where sidewalks are the norm, if they just follow the geometry of the road, they should be mapped as an attribute of the road with the "sidewalk=" key and not as a separate way. When they're disconnected at the ends so that they actively impe... | |
| 3 | 2018-08-14 15:57 | bhousel ♦278 | It would be great if, rather than removing the sidewalks, you would just connect them to the road where crossings exist. It's not a matter of "personal preference" - there are groups working on wheelchair routing that need to map attributes on the sidewalk ways (like smoothness and o... | |
| 4 | 2018-08-14 16:14 | TheBestIdea ♦110 | There appears to be a robust debate about whether sidewalks should be separate ways: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Sidewalks#Sidewalk_as_separate_way If people want to take to time to do so, I'm not going to stop them, but they should do it in a way that does not impede routing for other ... | |
| 5 | 2018-08-14 16:35 | bhousel ♦278 | Yes, I'm aware of the wiki page. Again, the primary usecase for this style of mapping is for wheelchair users who can not cross the street mid-block. It does not impede routing for other users (I'm not sure why some people think this). | |
| 6 | 2018-08-14 17:01 | jmapb ♦404 | None of these #maproulette #Long_Island_traffic_lights_(Brooklyn,_Queens) sidewalks have any wheelchair or smoothness info. I've actually never seen any such info on sidewalks here. (I have seen sloped_curb=yes on some *road* intersections, but that's obsolete now.) Yes, it might be added ... | |
| 7 | 2018-08-14 17:02 | jmapb ♦404 | Personally I only map sidewalks when I perceive that it would improve routing, but I can easily imagine that at some point in the future mapping every sidewalk will be the norm. I'm not inclined to fight against this -- but I do want people to map responsibly, so that the map isn't less us... | |
| 8 | 2018-08-14 17:11 | jmapb ♦404 | BTW here is a very silly example of screwed up pedestrian routing. (Wheelchair routing would have the same problem, I believe.)https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_foot&route=40.60721%2C-74.01134%3B40.60740%2C-74.01154#map=19/40.60770/-74.01090&layers=N | |
| 9 | 2018-08-14 17:14 | bhousel ♦278 | jmapb, please leave me alone. If you need help adding a crosswalk to fix that routing issue, ask on help.openstreetmap.org | |
| 10 | 2018-08-14 17:18 | jmapb ♦404 | These comments are not a personal attack and your defensiveness is uncalled for. I'm discussing the changeset. If you don't want to part of the changeset discussion, hit the "unsubscribe" button. | |
| 11 | 2018-08-14 19:15 | MikeN | I've observed new mappers drawing these types of sidewalks without crossings because they appear to 'stop at the curb'. They're just entering an observation. I'd see it as a work in progress, and not usable for navigation on its own until the network has been fully entere... | |
| 12 | 2018-08-14 20:43 | jmapb ♦404 | I don't think these are being mapped this way because they stop at the curb -- there are clearly visible crosswalks at all of the hanging ends. I don't know whether homeslice60148 prefers to map this way or if it's part of the maproulette instructions (? I don't know how maproule... | |
| 13 | 2018-08-14 20:45 | jmapb ♦404 | BTW this changset (61631661) has been reverted by changeset 61662763 (restoring the deleted sidewalks), and the loose sidewalk ends have been tied into the street grid by changeset 61662897. This will improve the routing. It will still be a left and two rights to get from 691 Fulton to 239 Ashland P... | |
| 14 | 2018-08-14 20:48 | TheBestIdea ♦110 | I agree that your suggestion would be a big improvement. | |
| 15 | 2018-08-14 21:26 | jmapb ♦404 | Happy to hear it. And MikeN. by the way, I believe I misread what you meant by "end at the curb" -- yes indeed, the sidewalks themselves do literally end at the curb, crosswalks or no, and I can easily imagine a mapper choosing to map them in this literal fashion without realizing that it ... | |
| 16 | 2018-08-15 16:58 | jmapb ♦404 | Well I added my sample "cap" at the Fulton/Ashland place, changeset 61672263. If there's ever a consensus to purge these loose-end sidewalks that survives the edit wars, please feel free to get rid of that too -- it's only useful IMO as a fix to routing problem the loose ends cau... | |
| 17 | 2018-08-15 19:24 | homeslice60148 ♦5 | Hi everyone! | |
| 18 | 2018-08-15 19:46 | homeslice60148 ♦5 | Whoops, let's try this again. Hi, everyone! I just noticed jmapb's message and I'm jumping into the discussion here to let everyone know what I'm doing and why. I am a very long time mapper on OSM, and it is my general goal to improve the map. I personally follow the "do no... | |
| 19 | 2018-08-16 16:46 | jmapb ♦404 | Hi homeslice, thanks for joining us -- I shouldn't have given up so quickly! And thanks for being clear about your goals and MO.As I said, I've admired your sidewalks. But I hope I've also demonstrated the downside this mapping technique has on the pedestrian routing. When sidewal... | |
| 20 | 2018-08-17 20:02 | homeslice60148 ♦5 | J, I think the solution of closing the crosswalks for routing will work. I will do this from now on. | |
| 21 | 2018-08-17 21:02 | jmapb ♦404 | Thanks! (Btw I think I mapped your place today: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1829661485 ) | |
| 60342709 by ashleyannmathew @ 2018-07-02 09:53 | 1 | 2018-07-30 22:13 | MikeN | Why were these driveways reverted to construction state? |
| 2 | 2018-07-31 09:41 | ashleyannmathew ♦13 | Hi Mike,Thanks for your query. I have reverted the highway back to service. I am working on fixing all highway topology errors across the US, where crossing highway is one of them. Crossing highways are highways that cross each other without a common node at its intersection. While fixing it in t... | |
| 3 | 2018-07-31 11:01 | MikeN | Thank you - Bing has been updated since that survey and it is clearer that the shopping center is already built and was not mapped from planning document papers. | |
| 4 | 2018-07-31 11:25 | ashleyannmathew ♦13 | Yes, thank you for the update | |
| 60364351 by volatile_ant @ 2018-07-03 04:39 | 1 | 2018-07-03 05:03 | phidauex ♦194 | Hi, I don't know enough about imports to recommend the right process, but with the new MS building footprint I know there is a lot of discussion going on. The #colorado channel in the OSM slack channel (https://osmus.slack.com/messages/C4WKKHH0V/) might be a good place to start before jumping i... |
| 2 | 2018-07-03 05:10 | phidauex ♦194 | FYI, found a few odd things that the MS footprint algorithm was doing - it marked some of the airport striping as buildings, and has a problem with circular buildings - it very much wants them to be square. I fixed a few, see this changelog for examples: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/60364... | |
| 3 | 2018-07-03 13:57 | volatile_ant ♦4 | Thanks for the slack link. Both of the changesets associated with this update contain unintended data (I used incorrect filter settings). I attempted to revert them last night, but you were too quick! I'll check out the discussion, and will be reviewing the changesets building-by-building over ... | |
| 4 | 2018-07-03 14:05 | volatile_ant ♦4 | I've never used slack before, and am having trouble signing in. Is it an invite-only group? | |
| 5 | 2018-07-03 14:48 | MikeN | Try this link - https://osmus-slack.herokuapp.com/ | |
| 6 | 2018-07-03 16:08 | phidauex ♦194 | Sorry for jumping the gun on the fixes, I was curious about the dataset quality to so spent a few minutes looking it over. Pretty darn good, really, but with a few odd errors. Feel free to revert me. Lots of discussion going on about the MS import now, on the email list, and the #general and #colora... | |
| 7 | 2018-07-03 16:42 | volatile_ant ♦4 | Thanks Mike, that worked. I'll flip through the discussion.Agreed that the data quality is generally pretty good for simple forms and smaller buildings. There are definitely questionable items, such as a huge amorphous blob of a building placed in the middle of a field, and silos being squa... | |
| 59948539 by SProvost @ 2018-06-18 15:08 | 1 | 2018-06-22 00:08 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | Doesn't look bad, but lanes shouldn't be used on laneless streets. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59948539 |
| 2 | 2018-06-26 14:04 | SProvost ♦1 | Thanks for your feedback Paul. It's actually the first time I create new features in OSM, I normally only edit existing ones. So all constructive feedback is welcome. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59948539 | |
| 3 | 2018-06-30 14:57 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | At least in the US and Canada, there's an understanding that the only time lanes=* should be tagged on a street with no painted lanes is where the lines are missing due to lack of maintenance. These streets, lanes=2 isn't appropriate because there's no lanes nor evidence that lanes w... | |
| 4 | 2018-06-30 16:14 | bhousel ♦278 | It's totally ok to add lanes tags to laneless streets. | |
| 5 | 2018-06-30 18:06 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | That really seems a lot like just making stuff up at that point, bhousel. | |
| 6 | 2018-07-01 10:37 | MikeN | I also don't know of a convention in the US and Canada where it is incorrect to add lanes to stripeless roads. | |
| 7 | 2018-07-01 11:49 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | How is it not geofiction to do so? | |
| 8 | 2018-07-01 18:27 | MikeN | It explicitly models the road as 2 traffic flows where normal size vehicles pass each other, as well as differentiating from 1 lane roads where one vehicle would need to back up to an opening to pass. | |
| 9 | 2018-07-01 18:42 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | Except on streets like this, that's not really reliably possible when someone's parked on one or both sides of the street unless you're on something singletrack. You make a strong argument for tagging width=* after measuring it, though. | |
| 59298405 by westsider28 @ 2018-05-26 17:33 | 1 | 2018-05-27 11:22 | MikeN | I was so careful to get the 'e' on Pointe that I didn't proofread the whole name! |
| 59179094 by teodorab_telenav @ 2018-05-22 12:35 | 1 | 2018-05-22 19:40 | MikeN | This edit was correct, in that it matches the new name on the latest TIGER, but the name didn't sound right. I checked the county records and they still show the old name Countryside Circle. So I'm not sure how the wrong name got into TIGER 2017. |
| 59180915 by teodorab_telenav @ 2018-05-22 13:42 | 1 | 2018-05-22 17:54 | MikeN | I'm not sure that the result of this edit is desirable. Although it strictly agrees with the OSM philosophy of separate ways only in the case of physical divider, southbound routing instructions to Edwards Mill Road are "turn right", followed by "turn immediate left", inst... |
| 2 | 2018-05-24 05:48 | teodorab_telenav ♦16 | Hello Mike,I deleted the link because I coudn't find any physical divider according to sattelite imageries ( Bing, Mapbox, Digital Globe). Anyway, I will reverse the changes. Thank you for letting me know that the edit is not desirable.Best regards,Teodora | |
| 59114846 by itsamap! @ 2018-05-20 03:56 | 1 | 2018-05-20 10:51 | MikeN | The school name appears on the boundary of the school - in most cases with OSM, the building does not have the school name. That allows for multiple buildings, and having the name on the area makes it show sooner when zooming in. |
| 2 | 2018-05-20 13:15 | itsamap! ♦13 | Got it thanks, I just changed it. | |
| 59027356 by markm851003 @ 2018-05-16 18:37 | 1 | 2018-05-16 19:37 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for this edit. What was the source for this change when there were recent edits and notes about this intersection? |
| 2 | 2018-05-16 20:31 | markm851003 ♦38 | Hello, Mike I see that you are correct. These edits were made on a HOT tasking project, I had consulted with a peer and we thought we were making the right changes including the recent notes. In reality the edit made was a misinterpretation of the data. I will update this immediately, thank you for... | |
| 3 | 2018-05-16 20:32 | markm851003 ♦38 | I will also update the source notes on this. | |
| 4 | 2018-05-17 02:26 | MikeN | Thank you for correcting this. Feel free to leave a note for someone local to look at any questionable items. (That's the way I learned that there is a wooden covered bridge near me that I had no idea was there). | |
| 58394251 by Union Street Media @ 2018-04-25 02:54 | 1 | 2018-04-25 15:37 | MikeN | Thanks for adding these new roads! A tip to make it easier to see the roads under the trees is to use the NC imagery - select the Layers button on the right side, then for Background select "NC Latest Orthoimagery" |
| 58393641 by Union Street Media @ 2018-04-25 01:58 | 1 | 2018-04-25 14:55 | MikeN | Hi, I see that Long Pond Lane was added as a "motorway". Although this sounds like permission for motor vehicles, it is normally only used on Interstate highways. Small roads like this would normally be Residential or 'Minor/Unclassified' if there are no houses nearby. |
| 2 | 2018-05-11 15:20 | Union Street Media ♦1 | It looks like the feature has been changed from motorway to residential, thank you. Let me know if you see any other corrections. | |
| 58039457 by Union Street Media @ 2018-04-12 15:47 | 1 | 2018-04-25 02:21 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap! Why was Burl Lane deleted in this changeset? |
| 58115218 by Mizan_CU @ 2018-04-15 17:17 | 1 | 2018-04-15 21:40 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap! Please take care when editing because a node was moved for a long distance by the stadium. That part of the edit was undone. |
| 57868426 by jess0302 @ 2018-04-06 15:08 | 1 | 2018-04-06 23:20 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for the edits! The ways marked as motorways are not really motorways. The best way to make a private map for events and share them is on UMap https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/This was reverted in #57880411 |
| 57617184 by farmerhen @ 2018-03-29 00:38 | 1 | 2018-03-29 02:37 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap! Please be careful when editing because this edit removed a city boundary so I had to revert it. |
| 57257307 by dmcbride98 @ 2018-03-17 02:22 | 1 | 2018-03-17 12:24 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for the work in aligning. There were still some side streets that needed updating. Please be aware that current Bing imagery is shifted - please select the layers / background imagery icon and select the "Esri World Imagery (Clarity)" which has much better agreement with G... |
| 57195404 by Greenville_SC_City_MSImport_1 @ 2018-03-15 02:07 | 1 | 2018-03-15 06:04 | user_5359 ♦19,375 | Welcome to OSM! Your import use some unusual values (addr:state="South Carolina", phone numbers missing the + sign, addresses without the combination addr:street and addr:housenumber). Is this import discussed on the import mailing list? |
| 2 | 2018-03-15 10:34 | MikeN | This import step only added height to existing buildings; therefore the JOSM validation only checked for geometry conflicts and gross key errors. Phone numbers look as they would if entered by hand and won't conform to a strict format. This import was discussed on Imports - https://lists.ope... | |
| 56911115 by Gaguy2012 @ 2018-03-05 18:02 | 1 | 2018-03-05 19:33 | MikeN | Welcome to Open Street Map! The empty outline needs to be identified for what type of object it is, such as a building. Also, the "Ellison's Law" point needs to be separated into separate items instead of just being in the description. For an example, see the tags on https://www.... |
| 56818627 by boku_3 @ 2018-03-02 12:25 | 1 | 2018-03-02 19:00 | MikeN | Everything looks great, thank you! |
| 56801039 by boku_3 @ 2018-03-01 21:08 | 1 | 2018-03-01 23:33 | MikeN | Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap! Everything looks great but the opening hours syntax is specialized so that Apps can read the opening hours directly. I have updated the opening hours according to the wiki at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours |
| 56669410 by Kelfwall @ 2018-02-25 19:50 | 1 | 2018-02-26 01:06 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! I have promoted the primary name of the nearby road to Pocotaligo Road and made the state road number as alternate, since that should help addressing and directions. |
| 2 | 2018-02-26 03:34 | Kelfwall ♦1 | Thank you MikeN!! | |
| 56554717 by Michael Frazier @ 2018-02-21 16:34 | 1 | 2018-02-21 21:04 | MikeN | Hi, thanks for adding these. For buildings, choose a building type (roof, house, office, etc) instead of landuse. I went ahead and updated these.You can also make the outlines look neat by Squaring with the S key after they have been drawn. |
| 56539662 by clay_c @ 2018-02-21 06:07 | 1 | 2018-02-21 18:20 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | I still have some concerns about this mass attempt at priority creep on the highway=* tag. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging#Secondary_taghttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging#Tertiary_highways |
| 2 | 2018-02-21 20:37 | MikeN | I agree about concerns with mass priority creep. DOT / Government classifications do not directly translate to an OSM classification. Routers will still select a road when it best matches the travel itinerary and mode. | |
| 3 | 2018-02-21 22:56 | clay_c ♦489 | Alright, I'll put a pause to this change for a bit. I want to continue this discussion later, though right now I think I just need to take a break. Thanks for being patient. | |
| 4 | 2018-02-22 01:50 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | No problem, thanks for being open on this. Last time there was someone who went a little too strict with the tagging, we ended up with the entire US highway system tagged trunk nationwide | |
| 5 | 2018-02-26 22:47 | clay_c ♦489 | Alright, I'm back and my head's clear. Thanks for giving me some time.I want to make sure we're on the same page with a few things. I'm avoiding being strict on tagging, and there's a few FM/RM roads I've tagged higher than secondary as well as state/US highways low... | |
| 6 | 2018-02-27 01:51 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | RIght, generally a good idea to weight the local functionality with the classification to kind of rank it out. Like a major thoroughfare through a city (like, say, FM 2786 or CR 150 in Allen) might be underrated even as a secondary. But, say, FM 1885 or FM 920, northwest of Weatherford? Yeah, tha... | |
| 7 | 2018-02-27 01:56 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | Also, yeah, I'd fully agree that Texas makes for especially odd classification owing to it's huge number of auxiliary routes, of various and often nebulous significance, such as, despite signage, there is only one Ranch Road (RM 1), and *all* of the rest are properly FMs, and while the FMs... | |
| 56277479 by jjbalins @ 2018-02-11 23:16 | 1 | 2018-02-12 13:37 | MikeN | Hi, I noticed that others had added Lost Grove Lake Wildlife Mangement Area as both a park and nature reserve and overlapping areas. One of those could probably be deleted, but I wasn't sure whether it should be a park or nature reserve. |
| 56277499 by jjbalins @ 2018-02-11 23:18 | 1 | 2018-02-12 13:35 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for adding the lake. I think I was able to finish it according to the NAIP imagery which was newer than Bing and shows some more water expansion. |
| 2 | 2018-02-13 00:48 | jjbalins ♦1 | thanks! | |
| 55902002 by RigIsMe @ 2018-01-30 17:50 | 1 | 2018-01-30 17:58 | RigIsMe ♦1 | pokemon |
| 2 | 2018-01-30 18:24 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap. Fell and Chataqua were already marked as a park. Creating overlapping parks causes collisions in Pokemon spawning algorithms and actually reduces the spawning rate. | |
| 55878803 by therealjosh352 @ 2018-01-30 02:19 | 1 | 2018-01-30 12:20 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap. Miller Park was already marked as a park. Creating overlapping parks causes collisions in Pokemon spawning algorithms and actually reduces the spawning rate. |
| 55865303 by dentistdrpowell @ 2018-01-29 16:36 | 1 | 2018-01-29 19:50 | MikeN | Hello! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.o... |
| 55683793 by williamsburgsuiteshotel @ 2018-01-23 13:20 | 1 | 2018-01-23 14:24 | MikeN | Why was the building removed? |
| 55579670 by vjeranc @ 2018-01-19 14:25 | 1 | 2018-01-19 15:45 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap - this fix looks great because of the separator between lanes. Thanks for your contribution! |
| 55340301 by pezhead @ 2018-01-11 02:48 | 1 | 2018-01-11 12:37 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap! The Cleveland Park outline already existed, so I transferred the new tags to the existing park outline. |
| 55288516 by innatusc @ 2018-01-09 10:08 | 1 | 2018-01-10 03:30 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap! Why was the building outline removed? Also, when specifying an address or street name, the convention is to spell out the name in full - such as "Pendleton Street". |
| 2 | 2018-01-10 22:26 | MikeN | Reverted to restore building in changeset 55336454 | |
| 54709267 by itsamap! @ 2017-12-17 17:42 | 1 | 2017-12-17 23:18 | MikeN | South Church Street is set to 1 lane - a single lane usually goes on a oneway street, otherwise a car would need to pull onto a shoulder or driveway when meeting an oncoming car. |
| 2 | 2017-12-17 23:23 | itsamap! ♦13 | Ok that's good to know before I went crazy changing things! I already changed alot of roads to 1 lane. I'll change them back.Thanks! | |
| 54708187 by itsamap! @ 2017-12-17 17:00 | 1 | 2017-12-17 23:16 | MikeN | Congratulations - it looks good from JOSM! |
| 54398192 by Downtownandrew @ 2017-12-06 11:30 | 1 | 2017-12-06 12:56 | MikeN | Welcome to OSM! I noticed that there are 3 library nodes added, but they are not on any building. It might be new construction, but the building that looks like a library is to the right of these nodes. |
| 3904994 by MikeNBulk @ 2010-02-17 21:57 | 1 | 2017-11-23 00:11 | HubMiner ♦271 | Greetings, could you take a look at this note: http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/675095I am wondering if there a way to reimport river/islands outlines based on something more recent. |
| 2 | 2017-11-23 02:21 | MikeN | The latest data still has this shape, so the best way will be a manual update to match the current wetland configuration. I'll make this a project for me in the next week or 2. | |
| 29293728 by JordanKepler @ 2015-03-06 17:08 | 1 | 2017-11-08 21:12 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,632 | Can you look at https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1200172 ? |
| 2 | 2017-11-08 23:49 | MikeN | This area consists of parking lots and building foundations of a former factory site. Although there is no active plan for redevelopment of this site, the OSM tag landuse - 'brownfield' captures the demolished / industrial state of this site. | |
| 53210063 by JasonOsborne @ 2017-10-24 14:31 | 1 | 2017-10-25 12:21 | MikeN | Thank you for the street name updates. It would be interesting to know the street signs around "Palm Street" - there is a section heading north that appears to be an original mistake from TIGER or has been removed. Also there is a section of Palm Street between Independence Avenue and &q... |
| 52894161 by JasonOsborne @ 2017-10-13 13:51 | 1 | 2017-10-13 21:17 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap! These street name corrections are great. We do enter the full name without abbreviations, since it is easy to abbreviate names, but difficult to expand all the variations when needed. Happy Mapping! |
| 52017697 by Its_JAC @ 2017-09-13 19:28 | 1 | 2017-09-14 01:28 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap! Great job in adding this clinic. Thank you for your contributions. |
| 52013163 by practicalmathematics @ 2017-09-13 16:58 | 1 | 2017-09-13 18:09 | MikeN | Welcome to OpenStreetMap! Everything added here looks good. The combination public library and technical college is an unusual case. OpenStreetMap is flexible in how to tag these but would normally be added as 2 separate nodes/points so that both the library and school show as expected on a sea... |
| 51761564 by brynnan37 @ 2017-09-05 19:49 | 1 | 2017-09-06 01:42 | MikeN | The residential neighborhood outline looks great! The only other change is that the name should be in a tag called 'name'. So, select the neighborhood outline, then in the "Add Field", select name , then enter the name. After that, the 'Description' entry can be rem... |
| 51760778 by Jacob T @ 2017-09-05 19:28 | 1 | 2017-09-06 01:33 | MikeN | Hi, for an address to be visible to search in OpenStreetMap, the number ( 231 ) should be typed over the light gray 123 below Address, and the street ( Tunnel Road ) should be selected from the dropdown. The full text in 'name' is not required. For the rare cases where it's used, i... |
| 51739971 by brynnan37 @ 2017-09-05 07:40 | 1 | 2017-09-05 18:42 | MikeN | Hi, the residential area looks good. The lines of a residential area generally do not touch roadways to make future edits easier. If the area has a subdivision name, that can be added to the area also. If the entire subdivision has one name, this residential area can be expanded first to cover ... |
| 51728252 by DHN9 @ 2017-09-04 18:52 | 1 | 2017-09-05 10:46 | MikeN | OpenStreetMap is a database reflecting real world features. Please do not make fictional edits, or they will be reverted. This edit reverted in #51745421 . Also, please add a comment that describes the change(s) |
| 51735786 by nsage @ 2017-09-05 03:38 | 1 | 2017-09-05 10:40 | MikeN | Thanks for the update. Your edit did remove the park attribute, but I also deleted the point since it does not apply any more. |
| 51495965 by DHN9 @ 2017-08-28 02:33 | 1 | 2017-08-28 20:13 | MikeN | The apartments are a residential area, not a park |
| 51495982 by DHN9 @ 2017-08-28 02:36 | 1 | 2017-08-28 20:06 | MikeN | There is no park here among the retail buildings |
| 51393304 by filth @ 2017-08-24 03:26 | 1 | 2017-08-24 11:44 | bbmiller ♦104 | Nope. These parks do exist in their mapped locations, and if you look at the history of these ways, they existed way before the Pokemon phenomenon. Would you please revert your change set? Or should I? |
| 2 | 2017-08-24 19:49 | filth ♦1 | ahh my apologies. i figured they were there for pokemon purposes. however they are not parks so should be taken out regardless. my dad lives a block away at rose court and i walk by there weekly there's no parks at those locations | |
| 3 | 2017-08-24 19:52 | filth ♦1 | someone probably added them for ingress then and not pokemon i'm guessing? both are residential areas, there's just houses there, no parks | |
| 4 | 2017-08-24 21:19 | MikeN | Traverse City still lists those two parks as active http://www.traversecitymi.gov/downloads/boon_street_arbutus_ct_2010.pdf | |
| 5 | 2017-08-25 01:09 | bbmiller ♦104 | Yeah, and they're visible on Street View: https://www.google.com/maps/@44.7442222,-85.5970059,3a,90y,3.83h,74.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1st9KpajR0D8L7FSJPwTd9pw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656https://www.google.com/maps/@44.7442259,-85.5988699,3a,75y,343.87h,69.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLyODIlwG5bEai-bSjYJT1Q... | |
| 6 | 2017-08-25 12:30 | bbmiller ♦104 | OK, I got curious and swung by Boon St this morning. Sure enough, the parks are there, just as mapped.Boon Street Park: https://flic.kr/p/Xsj2mAArbutus Court Park: https://flic.kr/p/Y4oR8pI'm undeleting these. I'm also going to take advantage of this opportunity to add a few deta... | |
| 50853913 by itsamap! @ 2017-08-05 03:27 | 1 | 2017-08-16 11:14 | MikeN | In OSM, I can't find any convention to tag an apartment complex area as an apartments type; we only have landuse=residential and individual buildings are of type building=apartments. The entire area could be place=neighborhood. |
| 50768598 by luca4975 @ 2017-08-02 03:02 | 1 | 2017-08-02 12:29 | MikeN | OpenStreetMap is a collection of facts - social commentary is best done on other types of media.Reverted in http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/50779623 |
| 50012633 by westsider28 @ 2017-07-03 15:50 | 1 | 2017-07-03 23:08 | MikeN | Hi, if the island doesn't show up, the lake might need to be converted to a multipolygon (in the ID editor, select both the island and lake, right click and merge). Hopefully all the tags will come out correctly. |
| 49915146 by carmenhotel @ 2017-06-29 10:56 Active block | 1 | 2017-06-29 17:39 | MikeN | This is actually a retail building and 'Home Improvement' is not a recognized tourism category. I've corrected both. |
| 49772255 by Saucon Support @ 2017-06-23 14:38 Active block | 1 | 2017-06-25 16:37 | MikeN | Hi, is this the current or planned speed limit change? Signs are still up for 55mph. |
| 2 | 2017-06-26 12:48 | Saucon Support Active block | Comment not displayed. To view it, please select the "Include blocked users" option. | |
| 46220398 by Evanavichi @ 2017-02-19 16:32 | 1 | 2017-06-23 12:10 | MikeN | This is not a park, it is a subdivision. Please add only real features to OpenStreetMap. Reverted. |
| 49481996 by westsider28 @ 2017-06-12 21:14 | 1 | 2017-06-13 00:11 | MikeN | You're doing a great job improving Spartanburg! Sidewalks are fine either separately or tagged as part of the road. Tagging will settle in OSM as more apps start to use the data. Open Sidewalks ( https://www.opensidewalks.com/ ) generally makes them separate at the moment so that it is easie... |
| 49317899 by DAC Rochester @ 2017-06-06 20:18 | 1 | 2017-06-07 11:25 | MikeN | Node was already merged into building and the tagging standardized. Reverted change. |
| 48625768 by noblevegas @ 2017-05-12 14:19 | 1 | 2017-05-12 15:14 | MikeN | Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap, and thanks for your valuable updates! In the future when updating a business, it is generally better to remove the previous business information from the node or building outline and then create the new information. This is because some businesses in OpenStreetMap... |
| 48091460 by arizonainn @ 2017-04-24 13:28 | 1 | 2017-04-24 18:03 | MikeN | This node is a duplicate of an existing Blaine's Farm & Fleet node http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2813268358 . The new information has been merged into the existing node and this new node was deleted. |
| 2 | 2017-04-24 18:04 | MikeN | Please check for existing business nodes before adding new ones. Also update the changeset description to something more descriptive. Thank you, | |
| 48091328 by arizonainn @ 2017-04-24 13:26 | 1 | 2017-04-24 17:46 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for this submission. 1. The name had the HTML Escape characters (%27), but the normal punctuation may be used in names. 2. There was already a business here , but with the local name (locals say "Farm & Fleet", not "Blaine's Farm & Fleet") I adde... |
| 47849759 by schulf @ 2017-04-16 21:31 | 1 | 2017-04-16 22:55 | MikeN | Hi, thanks for your submissions! I noticed that Orion's Bar & Grill had already been marked in the building, so the node is a duplicate. |
| 47802351 by HedCheeeeese @ 2017-04-15 03:23 | 1 | 2017-04-15 17:29 | MikeN | Hi, welcome to OpenStreetMap and thanks for your contributions! A note about the end of Sawblade Ridge - a "Living Street" is normally a pedestrian area that allows cars only at 3-5 MPH. I would expect the end of this street to terminate in a turning circle instead of a living street. ... |
| 2 | 2017-04-15 22:35 | HedCheeeeese ♦1 | Its 25 mph, its an unmarked paved road, wide enough for two cars so I guess it counts as two lanes. Theres no distinction and Everton just drives on whichever side or straight up the middle until the come upon another car. The end is a turning circle but its small and there are homes around it. I�... | |
| 46287490 by Riazaku @ 2017-02-21 21:19 | 1 | 2017-02-22 13:35 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for these updates. Was the speed limit for 123 around the Issaqueena trail exit recently changed? |
| 45962171 by alboslaya @ 2017-02-10 02:29 | 1 | 2017-02-16 00:47 | MikeN | Are these real parks, visitor center and country club? |
| 2 | 2017-02-16 06:02 | alboslaya ♦3 | Yes. They are small community parks that join the two sub-neighborhoods of White Oak Cliffs and Lakewood. | |
| 3 | 2017-02-16 13:14 | MikeN | Are there signs identifying the parks and visitors center and vending area? | |
| 4 | 2017-02-17 12:02 | MikeN | Reverted in changeset 46162481. There is no trace of these parks, trails, or visitor center in an on-site survey. No public amenities for these subdivisions listed in http://www.lakekeoweerealestateexpert.com. Areas are zoned residential by city of Seneca http://www.seneca.sc.us/Portals/0/PDF/Pla... | |
| 45936641 by alboslaya @ 2017-02-09 04:42 | 1 | 2017-02-09 07:45 | Chetan_Gowda ♦214 | Reverting the changeset. |
| 2 | 2017-02-10 22:46 | MikeN | Hi and welcome to OpenStreetMap.The previous message from Chetan_Gowda was a bit terse, but if you are trying to manipulate Pokemon then please stop. OSM accepts all edits that are based on reality. Intentional edits based on fiction are considered vandalism and will be removed. | |
| 45962108 by alboslaya @ 2017-02-10 02:23 | 1 | 2017-02-10 11:50 | MikeN | What is the source you used to determine that this is not an administrative boundary? |
| 2 | 2017-02-10 16:40 | alboslaya ♦3 | I have lived in this area for 30+ years and know that this is not an administrative boundary. It was placed on the same nodes that surround Lake Keowee and barred no significance to any real world existing administrative boundaries. OpenStreetMap needs to be more accepting to local mappers that more... | |
| 3 | 2017-02-10 22:44 | MikeN | The administrative boundary that was deleted defined the city of Seneca, therefore that city is now undefined in OpenStreetMap. Cities don't place signs or flags around the municipal boundaries, they are legally defined at the regional records office. The city of Seneca is defined by that ... | |
| 45961595 by alboslaya @ 2017-02-10 01:42 | 1 | 2017-02-10 02:10 | MikeN | Hi thank you for the edits. Why were the roads changed to a type of unclassified? There are mostly residential homes along these streets. |
| 2 | 2017-02-10 02:54 | alboslaya ♦3 | There are some residential homes but this area is also home to three closely located parks and their corresponding maintenance/visitor buildings. These streets also have uniquely denoted walking paths for visitors traveling between the parks. To list these roads as residential is not quite the case ... | |
| 45776793 by anca_mihaela @ 2017-02-03 12:20 | 1 | 2017-02-03 12:59 | MikeN | Hi, just a note about the tag spelling - it should be ' junction ' , not jonction . Thanks! |
| 2 | 2017-02-08 06:17 | anca_mihaela ♦2 | thx | |
| 45757784 by Gabriel daniels @ 2017-02-02 19:42 | 1 | 2017-02-03 00:42 | MikeN | Hi and welcome to OpenStreetMap. I see you have added a water body and a number of crossing paths at a location which is really an apartment building.If you are trying to manipulate Pokemon then please stop. OSM accepts all edits that are based on reality. Intentional edits based on fiction are co... |
| 45462466 by Kelly Summerlin @ 2017-01-25 05:29 | 1 | 2017-01-25 13:00 | MikeN | Hi, Thank you for the edits! Just a note about old railroads - if they're already marked as abandoned, they won't show up on the map view. I'll agree that they technically don't belong if they no longer exist and they clutter the edit view. But some rail fans still use them ... |
| 45207509 by sospastudio @ 2017-01-16 06:16 | 1 | 2017-01-16 14:07 | MikeN | Hi, I noticed that the original O2 had been deleted and replaced by the new POI. However some information was dropped in the process: the opening hours and business type. Also, the new position was not as accurate as the original position as surveyed. It is best to just modify an existing POI ... |
| 38568749 by Tom Hogan @ 2016-04-14 20:33 | 1 | 2017-01-15 03:48 | MikeN | Hi, has this section of railroad out to San Jon been rebuilt now? It had previously been abandoned. Thanks, |
| 43959909 by miluethi_MassMutation @ 2016-11-26 09:29 | 1 | 2016-11-26 11:33 | MikeN | Hi, has this import been reviewed by the process in http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines ?Thanks, |
| 2 | 2016-12-13 17:56 | woodpeck_repair ♦33,903 | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 44334107 where the changeset comment is: Revert un-discussed and erroneous building footprint imports, see http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/43899797 http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/43886022 http://www.openstreetmap.org/user_... | |
| 43430344 by bhj867 @ 2016-11-05 21:03 | 1 | 2016-11-18 14:53 | MikeN | Hi - question about the 'Tunnel Hill State Trail'; this was changed from railway=abandoned to railway=rail . Are there actually rails present along this section of trail? |
| 43526330 by Omnific @ 2016-11-10 07:06 | 1 | 2016-11-10 13:08 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for the edits. I had originally used the "Cook-out" form with a dash because that is used consistently on signage and the web site.I suppose the dash makes it harder to search though; people will search for CookOut or "Cook Out". |
| 2 | 2016-11-10 17:21 | Omnific ♦202 | Hi Mike, I believe they have rebranded as just Cook Out based on their website, which now uses "Cook Out" instead of "Cook-Out." The logo make it a bit questionable, but they have text like "TIME FOR COOK OUT" and "Cook Out cares about the quality of both our food ... | |
| 42333814 by Curtis Beck @ 2016-09-21 21:12 | 1 | 2016-09-22 00:42 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for the edits! Keep in mind that changing from a pedestrian street to monument will block routing apps from finding a path through the area. I have no strong opinion, but consider 'historic=memorial' together with highway=pedestrian / area=yes |
| 42136374 by jordankothe9 @ 2016-09-13 21:25 | 1 | 2016-09-14 12:13 | MikeN | Hi, Welcome to OSM and thank you for the updates! The best road type for driveway or parking lots is type "Service" , then select driveway, alley , or parking aisle. That will keep routing apps from sending cars across parking lots. Sam Clayton Blvd is fine as 'Unclassified&#... |
| 40557410 by samely @ 2016-07-07 22:14 | 1 | 2016-07-08 02:04 | MikeN | Hi, Thank you for the fix. White Horse Road Extension is mostly 2 lanes, with only a tiny part with a left turn lane.Also, some of the turn:lanes:forward tag is blank, which does not match the turn lane tagging in Wiki |
| 2 | 2016-07-11 16:14 | samely ♦201 | Hey there!I've already fixed the number of lanes in all the road. Thanks for your feedback. | |
| 39939813 by piligab @ 2016-06-10 19:40 | 1 | 2016-06-11 18:02 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for the fix. It seems that using a blank for the turn lane is not valid. See the normal usages at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:turn:lanes (the word 'none' is fully spelled out for special cases, but does not mean that no text is required ) |
| 2 | 2016-09-27 19:09 | piligab ♦60 | Hi MikeN,Both the none and blank tag is used while tagging turn lanes as can be verified from taginfo. The Lane and road attributes style also takes both the tagging scheme as valid. Since, there is no consensus on the tagging style to be adopted, our team decided to stick with blank instead of ... | |
| 38544388 by smatda @ 2016-04-14 03:22 | 1 | 2016-04-14 12:06 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for the corrections. I don't understand the change - neither of these roads were marked as One Way previously. Also, the highway tag for State Highway 56 was removed. |
| 2 | 2016-04-14 14:35 | smatda ♦1 | I appreciate the feedback. I'm new at this so bear with me. I do not know why, but on the current map GPS will not route down Musgrove Street from Smallwood to Willard Rd...it routes down Springdale Drive. If you look on Google maps it shows a small southern portion of Musgrove between E Flo... | |
| 3 | 2016-04-15 00:59 | MikeN | Hi, since there are 3 major map providers, it partly depends on which GPS device you are using. Is it a Garmin, or an app on your smartphone? If it's an app, which one is it? | |
| 4 | 2016-04-15 03:17 | smatda ♦1 | It's MapFactor on an Android. | |
| 5 | 2016-04-15 03:28 | smatda ♦1 | I found a similar issue with the routing between Jesup and Ludowici, GA. It appeared that there's a four lane bridge with all four lanes going the same direction. As a result routing will never use the four lane between the two towns. Instead it uses a 40 or 50 mile loop to go between the tw... | |
| 6 | 2016-04-15 11:11 | MikeN | Ok, I understand. I believe you have already corrected the Jesup<>Ludowici problem because it works today on the OpenStreetMap site. It should show in the next Mapfactor update.I had coincidentally edited a number of streets near Musgrove St on April 6 for the Corporate Center Drive op... | |
| 7 | 2016-04-16 08:38 | smatda ♦1 | Many thanks. This is our annual routing for vacation between Southwest Virginia and East Coast Florida. Headed to Ormond Beach just north of Daytona next month. If I see any anomalies I'll let you know. | |
| 37966742 by dchiles @ 2016-03-21 01:08 | 1 | 2016-03-21 11:18 | MikeN | What was the reason for this change? The previous relation route=railway (collection of railroad ways) sounds more applicable than the new route=train (train services), since this is an abandoned railway. |
| 2 | 2016-03-22 00:30 | dchiles ♦24 | I'm confused are we talking about this: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4661179 because it is route=railway | |
| 3 | 2016-03-22 00:41 | MikeN | Sorry, my bad. I confused which was the latest version. I think the new tag you set is the correct one. Thank you. | |
| 35395325 by JordanKepler @ 2015-11-18 04:40 | 1 | 2015-11-18 13:16 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for these improvements. I am a bit confused by some of the edits on Enterprise Boulevard - a section has been 'join'ed to another section that causes a bus route to extend into the new section, and there some new splits on that road. The ID editor has allowed this t... |
| 2 | 2017-07-26 18:52 | JordanKepler ♦6 | Dunoo. I may have been noodling stuff around for the sake of prettifying curves and straightening things, but ill check stuff more carefully now. | |
| 30249051 by samely @ 2015-04-15 20:30 | 1 | 2015-08-24 20:31 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for the edits. I found some problems -Frontage road was blocked years ago because it was a dangerous turn. It looks strange for a named road to be connected only by a driveway, but that's the real way it ended up. It would be dangerous for drivers to try to follow GPS for... |
| 2 | 2015-08-24 22:24 | MikeN | One thing that will help - if the TIGER:reviewed flag has been removed, do not modify that road back to old TIGER because someone local has already worked with it. | |
| 3 | 2015-08-24 22:46 | samely ♦201 | Hi there. Thanks for your feedback. I've been working based on TIGER, and I will consider your suggestion. Thanks again for fix them. | |
| 4 | 2015-08-30 21:34 | MikeN | Hi, I also found that this changeset moved more than 35,000 nodes. What was the reference used in moving those nodes? Thank you | |
| 5 | 2015-08-31 14:29 | samely ♦201 | Hey there. I just tried to align the edited area based on Bing satellite imagery. Thanks for the comments again. | |
| 33389957 by ramyaragupathy @ 2015-08-17 12:53 | 1 | 2015-08-27 01:12 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for the fix for alignment. One new problem with many people editing rail crossings is that some people have changed alignments at their crossing only. So the result is that while some parts of the rail is aligned, other parts are off. It will be best to review the entire length o... |
| 2 | 2015-08-27 14:43 | ramyaragupathy ♦54 | Thanks for highlighting this. Will be mindful of this in my future edits. Also I have corrected the alignment for the indicated ways. | |
| 3 | 2015-08-27 23:44 | MikeN | Many thanks - this has happened for several people during the challenge! | |
| 33549289 by karitotp @ 2015-08-24 15:08 | 1 | 2015-08-24 17:44 | MikeN | Hi, Thank you for the edit. This "Frontage Road" was removed many years ago, and most of it has grass or bushes growing on it. Since there are still traces, I changed it to type Track. |
| 2 | 2015-08-25 14:18 | karitotp ♦123 | "Hey there. Thanks for your feedback. As you told it's possible to see a road, but definitely it's not a highway=track, so I've changed it to a highway=unclassified. | |
| 3 | 2015-08-26 01:46 | MikeN | That area does not meet the definition of 'unclassified' in the Wiki, nor its common usage in North America (Roughly equivalent to 'residential' but without residences). Specifically it is no longer a public road, it is all on private land. I researched the public record bef... | |
| 4 | 2015-08-26 14:08 | karitotp ♦123 | thanks for the link , you are right according to the images that you sent me and the street classification corresponds more to be a highway = track .I am going to change the tag to a highway=track. | |
| 33555476 by abel801 @ 2015-08-24 19:24 | 1 | 2015-08-24 21:25 | MikeN | Hi, Thank you for the edits. Claude Collins Road was officially removed as a named street and is now a private driveway. Originally I had just deleted it, but I have changed it from a street to a driveway. |
| 2 | 2015-08-25 22:47 | abel801 ♦33 | Hi, thanks for the feedback, I have been working taking into account TIGER. thanks again for your fixing. | |
| 33235552 by srividya_c @ 2015-08-10 10:10 | 1 | 2015-08-20 12:43 | MikeN | Hi, Thank you for your edit! It appears that an entire railroad had been accidentally moved, and was misaligned. Since people had already corrected part of this in spots for the FRA Crossings project, the entire change could not be reverted to correct - I finally had to manually review and correct... |
| 2 | 2015-08-20 12:49 | srividya_c ♦57 | thank you for the feedback. Will review the ways from next time before editing them. Thank you again. | |
| 33310794 by aarthy @ 2015-08-13 11:54 | 1 | 2015-08-19 20:50 | MikeN | Hi, Thank you for your edit! It appears that an entire railroad has been accidentally moved, and now seems to be misaligned. I can undo this change; let me know what you wish to do. |
| 2 | 2015-08-20 12:40 | MikeN | It looks like someone else had moved the entire rail first in changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/33235552 . But there was also work since done by several people with local crossing fixes, so moving the entire rail was no longer possible. I manually fixed the entire line. | |
| 3 | 2015-11-16 08:24 | aarthy ♦5 | Thank you so much for doing so and sorry it's taken me so long to reply. | |
| 32523464 by missingspoke @ 2015-07-09 16:29 | 1 | 2015-07-09 16:46 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for the contribution to OpenStreetMap. Please clarify what was being added - the additions appear to be untagged. Thank you, |
| 32500295 by samely @ 2015-07-08 17:20 | 1 | 2015-07-08 19:34 | MikeN | Hi, thank you for the edit. Both streets were already surveyed on the ground and marked to remove tiger:reviewed=no. McLeod Street does not go through to Lafayette Street and that segment does not exist. TIGER was out of date for that street. |
| 2 | 2015-07-08 22:22 | samely ♦201 | Hey there. Thanks for your feedback. | |
| 30229497 by srividya_c @ 2015-04-15 07:56 | 1 | 2015-04-15 12:33 | MikeN | Hi - thanks for the update. The hill in this construction area has been bulldozed down and the previous streets were completely removed. There is no routable path through this area. It's too early to tell whether the replacement driveways will have any name because the buildings are still ... |
| 2 | 2015-04-15 14:03 | srividya_c ♦57 | thank you for you feedback. So are these roads existing now? I just aligned the nodes and added some roads seeing the imagery. Please remove the roads if they don't exit now. Thank you again. | |
| 3 | 2015-04-15 14:03 | srividya_c ♦57 | Sorry its *exist | |
| 4 | 2015-04-15 14:20 | MikeN | These roads don't exist now, so I'll remove them. The Bing imagery was out of date.Best regards | |
| 5 | 2015-04-16 05:05 | srividya_c ♦57 | okay, Thank you. | |
| 29386002 by JordanKepler @ 2015-03-10 14:48 | 1 | 2015-03-11 02:01 | MikeN | Hi, Just checking on Destiny Church - is there a problem specifying the building type instead of building=yes? That building was originally an industrial warehouse but was converted for the church. Thanks! |
| 2 | 2017-07-26 18:49 | JordanKepler ♦6 | I guess I figured that if it was a church, then it wasnt commercial? It might have been commercial in the past, but my understanding is that OSM is more concerned with the present state of things. | |
| 28800297 by Curtis Beck @ 2015-02-12 17:23 | 1 | 2015-02-13 01:38 | MikeN | Hi, Is the University Center moving here from its current location on Pleasantburg? ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/40173170 ) |
| 2 | 2015-02-13 16:56 | Curtis Beck ♦1 | Mike, Thanks for pointing this out to me. The University Center is not moving here. The corresponding map I am using pins the center to this location despite having the address listed on Pleasantburg as you do. I will go ahead and fix this | |
| 28742691 by TheKittyGirl @ 2015-02-10 03:42 | 1 | 2015-02-10 11:52 | MikeN | Hi - thank you for this addition. There is an improvement to help map users find Roper Ridge: If it is a hill / mountain, add the tags natural = peak . If it is a ridge line, add a line along the ridge and tag the line as natural = ridge and name = Roper Ridge |
| 2 | 2015-02-11 03:50 | TheKittyGirl ♦1 | Thank you for the help, MikeN! I better understand the tags here, thanks to you! | |
| 27362978 by Lisa Harrington @ 2014-12-09 18:48 | 1 | 2015-02-01 16:10 | MikeN | Please take care when scrolling the map in Potlatch so that the mouse doesn't grab and move a road instead of scrolling. I think I have corrected Houck Mountain Rd which was messing up routing. |
| 28345652 by Ryan112233 @ 2015-01-23 10:06 | 1 | 2015-01-23 12:24 | MikeN | Hi, Thank you for the edit. Please clarify why ways were removed from the trail relation, and what is meant by removing trail highlighting. |
| 2 | 2015-01-23 13:31 | Ryan112233 ♦1 | Hello. Thank you for your message. I thought taking away the highlighting of Jones Gap and Rainbow Falls trails would better serve to conformity of the rest of the trails in the Mountain Bridge trail system (as none others are highlighted). If you disagree then my apologies. I certainly do not m... | |
| 3 | 2015-01-24 03:09 | MikeN | Hi - I like your idea to make the trails in the Mountain Bridge trail system look more similar. Some trails are set as highway=path (dashed line) and others as highway=footway(dotted line). Bicycle permissions are set separately, so either path or footway could be used. The Hiking documentation... | |
| 4 | 2015-01-25 10:33 | Ryan112233 ♦1 | Good morning. Thank you. The map that shows the highlighted Jones Gap Trail and Rainbow Falls Trail is the "Cycle Map". Interestingly the other maps (standard, transport, mapquest, humanitarian) do not. | |
| 5 | 2015-01-29 02:37 | MikeN | Hi - We have been adding the relations to all the trails in the area; here is a link to the hiking map. They will appear on the next iteration of the Cycle map in the next 2 weeks. http://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/en/?zoom=13&lat=35.11326&lon=-82.59994&hill=0 | |
| 28320042 by HubMiner @ 2015-01-22 05:29 | 1 | 2015-01-22 13:04 | MikeN | Hi, The Rock River was set to landuse=industrial, which doesn't seem to apply to the entire river? |
| 2 | 2015-01-22 23:08 | HubMiner ♦271 | Thank you for catching this, reverted back to "riverbank". | |
| 3 | 2015-01-22 23:14 | HubMiner ♦271 | And fixed again: changed to "river". | |
| 26199248 by JordanKepler @ 2014-10-19 18:59 | 1 | 2015-01-11 02:47 | MikeN | Hi, Please don't combine street segments unless you have carefully studied why they were separated. Streets came in from TIGER as one piece, so any splits were for a reason: name change, speed limit change, lane attribute change, route relations, etc. I spent about 3 hours untangling the bus... |
| 2 | 2017-07-26 18:46 | JordanKepler ♦6 | Sorry my edits jangled up your bus routing n things. Ive only just now seen this, but Ill keep it in mind. Cheers. | |
| 26911138 by JordanKepler @ 2014-11-20 16:14 | 1 | 2014-11-21 12:31 | MikeN | Congratulations! |