aboges26 have been discussed with 4 replies of this contributoraboges26 have been discussed with 4 replies of this contributor| Changeset | # | Tmstmp UTC | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 158144820 by aboges26 @ 2024-10-20 20:26 | 1 | 2024-10-28 00:06 | Joseph R P ♦342 | Hello, what is the basis for classifying roads here? A lot of them seem over-classified to me and don't match the rest of the state's classifications on OSM. |
| 66444683 by aboges26 @ 2019-01-19 03:43 | 1 | 2022-08-26 20:41 | skquinn ♦804 | Do you remember what way 664547281 was supposed to be (currently untagged and not a relation member)? |
| 80566942 by aboges26 @ 2020-02-05 05:39 | 1 | 2021-05-14 19:59 | OldManCelli ♦96 | Some streams and rivers duplicated in this changeset. I will probably remove them since the existing rivers have for data. |
| 80566980 by aboges26 @ 2020-02-05 05:39 | 1 | 2020-02-09 22:37 | mapman44 ♦526 | In this changeset there were numerous duplicate streams and rivers added. Please take a look and decide which to keep and which to delete. Thanks. |
| 2 | 2021-05-14 19:58 | OldManCelli ♦96 | I just found this too. Since the added streams and rivers have fewer tags (no names) than the existing rivers I would vote for remove the newer ones. | |
| 42929915 by aboges26 @ 2016-10-16 05:56 | 1 | 2021-05-06 03:15 | Elyana IRM-ED ♦65 | I just modified the object based on Mapbox Satellite |
| 62189944 by aboges26 @ 2018-09-01 05:18 | 1 | 2021-03-09 11:24 | Kovirii ♦30 | What is the source for all the creeks in Dulce, NM? |
| 76124262 by aboges26 @ 2019-10-23 20:58 | 1 | 2020-12-15 23:54 | bradrh ♦66 | I don't want to change your edits without discussion, but I don't think the roads in Durango that you upgraded to Primary, should be primary. Secondary at best. E College, E 8th, Valdez Way. |
| 76162979 by aboges26 @ 2019-10-24 15:27 | 1 | 2020-08-06 04:24 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | Feeling like US 50 is a little overrated as a trunk; that value tends to be used as an indication that something's almost but not quite a motorway, not a two lane federal highway. Compare US 69 in Oklahoma. |
| 2 | 2020-08-06 04:24 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | Sorry, US 54. | |
| 76176002 by aboges26 @ 2019-10-24 22:23 | 1 | 2020-08-06 04:24 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | Feeling like US 50 is a little overrated as a trunk; that value tends to be used as an indication that something's almost but not quite a motorway, not a two lane federal highway. Compare US 69 in Oklahoma. |
| 60957181 by aboges26 @ 2018-07-22 17:02 | 1 | 2019-05-17 09:34 | snitch ♦6 | Dear aboges26,may I ask on which imagery you have seen the streams inside this coal mine https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/140856676 ? Bing it's not.Kind regards |
| 2 | 2020-04-03 18:13 | rivermont ♦221 | Looks like they were traced from the USGS Topo map, but they no longer exist since the quarry tore them up. I have removed them. There are still some other streams that don't seem to terminate anywhere; I wonder where the water ends up or if it just floods the quarry. See changeset #83049... | |
| 76520408 by aboges26 @ 2019-11-02 06:02 | 1 | 2020-01-12 23:34 | Your Village Maps ♦90 | I am wondering whether or not you (aboges26) are the person who mapped CO 71 as highway = trunk. If so, could you explain why you think it should be trunk? I will not change anything. I'm just curious. And even though most of US 24 between Limon and Colo Spgs is 2-lane, I don't really have... |
| 2 | 2020-02-18 20:03 | CrazyMonkeyBen ♦1 | I would also like to know why aboges26 changed these highways to Trunk. I know from personal experience that these are not trunk roads for most of their length. Incorrect Trunks include US50, US24 from Vail through CS to Limon, US160, CO17, US285. | |
| 3 | 2020-02-22 20:29 | Your Village Maps ♦90 | I see what you mean, CrazyMonkeyBen. I was not aware that all of those had been changed to Trunk. I wonder if aboges26 is using traffic volume data or just picked out what they thought were very important? I also noticed that CR 110 had been added to the ref for CO 17 (shortcut off US 285 in the San... | |
| 80566414 by aboges26 @ 2020-02-05 05:26 | 1 | 2020-02-09 22:53 | mapman44 ♦526 | There were hundreds of untagged points left behind in this changeset. I think I have cleaned up most of them but please check that with future work. Thanks. |
| 76543347 by aboges26 @ 2019-11-03 05:26 | 1 | 2019-12-16 04:26 | btwhite92 ♦99 | Why have all these single interchanges been bumped up from 'trunk' to 'motorway'? This is against tagging guidelines as specified under the Motorway section here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/Road_classification |
| 76180422 by aboges26 @ 2019-10-25 03:48 | 1 | 2019-11-23 21:16 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | I legitimately can't see how this is primary. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/76180422 |
| 2 | 2019-11-23 21:16 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 77469193 where the changeset comment is: Not primary. | |
| 3 | 2019-11-23 21:17 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 77469204 where the changeset comment is: Trunks are for expressways, not indiscriminately for US highways. | |
| 76519957 by aboges26 @ 2019-11-02 04:43 | 1 | 2019-11-23 21:15 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | When they're not expressways, they shouldn't be tagged trunk. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/76519957 |
| 2 | 2019-11-23 21:15 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | When they're not expressways, they shouldn't be tagged trunk. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/76519957 | |
| 76520124 by aboges26 @ 2019-11-02 05:19 | 1 | 2019-11-23 21:15 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | When they're not expressways, they shouldn't be tagged trunk. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/76520124 |
| 76542707 by aboges26 @ 2019-11-03 03:57 | 1 | 2019-11-23 21:15 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | When they're not expressways, they shouldn't be tagged trunk. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/76542707 |
| 76180646 by aboges26 @ 2019-10-25 03:58 | 1 | 2019-11-23 21:01 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | What's with retagging primaries as expressways? |
| 77171318 by aboges26 @ 2019-11-16 18:02 | 1 | 2019-11-17 09:47 | mueschel ♦6,567 | Hi,you added the key 'trckType' to hundreds of ways. This key is not used in any other place, was it a mistake?Jan |
| 74988384 by aboges26 @ 2019-09-27 04:32 | 1 | 2019-11-04 05:53 | freebeer ♦1,598 | moin,just wondering. in this changeset you seem to have created https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/728934729/history which at present bears no tags, and is not a member of any of the three relations this changeset affects.do you remember the purpose behind this way, which at least at time of... |
| 65518873 by aboges26 @ 2018-12-16 10:53 | 1 | 2018-12-17 09:22 | mueschel ♦6,567 | Hi,these ways all have some strange tags like the ones listed below. They don't look like they should be in OSM - was this a mistake?ACEC_EST_A=51.0ACEC_ID=ACEC009511ADMIN_ST=NMADM_OFC_CD=A01000ADM_UNIT_C=NMA01000GIS_ACRES=50.11602102LOC_ACEC_I=BluewaterLUP_NAME=Rio Puerco... |
| 62207733 by aboges26 @ 2018-09-01 21:59 | 1 | 2018-09-02 12:55 | Nakaner ♦3,147 | Hi aboges26,you have added many buildings in this changeset and mention "Bing" as source. However, I am unable to find a building on Bing matching this in OSM: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/621822316The same applies to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/621822882Which source... |
| 2 | 2018-09-04 09:20 | Nakaner ♦3,147 | Hi aboges26,OpenStreetMap is a collaborative project. As such, it is necessary that everyone reads the comments of other contributors and answers their questions.You can post your answer to my comment by opening https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/62207733 in your web browser and logging... | |
| 58496299 by aboges26 @ 2018-04-28 06:25 | 1 | 2018-05-09 01:12 | chachafish ♦462 | Howdy :) It looks like you did an import here that didn't quite go right? There appear to be many hundreds of untagged nodes along the La Plata River, for example, north and south of the township of Mayday. Could you look into this? Cheers :) |
| 2 | 2018-05-15 03:49 | chachafish ♦462 | Hello, along the La Plata River, there are hundreds of untagged nodes. Are these meant to represent something? Thank you | |
| 58495671 by aboges26 @ 2018-04-28 05:39 | 1 | 2018-04-29 15:00 | mueschel ♦6,567 | Hi,you uploaded 9 small areas with just foreign tags like "Shape_len" like this one https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/584093965Was this a mistake? Could you check & fix this?Jan |
| 56136763 by aboges26 @ 2018-02-07 04:04 | 1 | 2018-02-07 10:02 | glglgl ♦274 | Has Farmington ceased to exist? |
| 2 | 2018-03-19 03:25 | aboges26 | Why would you say that? | |
| 3 | 2018-03-19 08:18 | glglgl ♦274 | Because you deleted its admin relation (which I restored afterwards, see below) | |
| 4 | 2018-04-08 19:48 | aboges26 | Ah I see, I was trying to update its boundary because it had changed due to annexations and neglected to ensure its admin relation prevailed. Thank you for cleaning up my slop. | |
| 47679572 by aboges26 @ 2017-04-12 01:50 | 1 | 2017-04-30 03:42 | FTA ♦201 | Hi, is there a reason you deleted so many buildings in Lubbock? Did you perhaps leave your computer logged in somewhere?Best,Ethan aka FTA |
| 2 | 2018-03-19 03:29 | aboges26 | I deleted them because I drew them. | |
| 46155912 by aboges26 @ 2017-02-17 06:34 | 1 | 2017-07-13 20:43 | pulaskifire ♦1 | I'm curious about the neighborhood definition used here, eg Heart Of Lubbock defined as a residential area that excludes businesses vs defined more informally by the major thoroughfares. Reasoning? |
| 2 | 2018-03-19 03:28 | aboges26 | The residential neighborhood known as "Heart of Lubbock" is just that, a residential area. The neighborhoods of Lubbock are generally defined by major thoroughfares, and while the businesses would be considered part of the neighborhoods, their commercial developments tend to have their ow... | |
| 44775301 by aboges26 @ 2016-12-30 05:12 | 1 | 2017-08-12 19:10 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,110 | Seeing a lot, lot of ways in this changeset that were improperly upgraded to trunk when they're not semi-limited expressways...single carriageways only accessible via ramps or dual carriageways with limited surface intersections would be trunks. |
| 47679951 by aboges26 @ 2017-04-12 02:33 | 1 | 2017-04-19 13:49 | woodpeck ♦2,425 | You appear to have deleted a lot of data in this and other nearby changesets. May I ask why? |
| 42401323 by aboges26 @ 2016-09-24 08:53 | 1 | 2017-01-27 13:29 | katpatuka ♦194 | thanks for editing the Cấm Sơn Lake :) |
| 42906953 by aboges26 @ 2016-10-14 21:22 | 1 | 2016-10-14 23:45 | aboges26 | This is not from hotosm-project-2104 |
| 38596383 by aboges26 @ 2016-04-15 17:15 | 1 | 2016-04-15 17:17 | aboges26 | Actually an edit in Lubbock, TX, NOT Angola |
| 37443647 by aboges26 @ 2016-02-25 18:47 | 1 | 2016-02-26 17:12 | aboges26 | #GEOG4320 #TTU #youthmappers |
| 2 | 2016-02-26 20:39 | SomeoneElse ♦13,368 | Any chance of translating those hashtags into a human-readable language? :) | |
| 37447924 by aboges26 @ 2016-02-25 22:03 | 1 | 2016-02-26 17:12 | aboges26 | #GEOG4320 #TTU #youthmappers |
| 37450883 by aboges26 @ 2016-02-26 02:25 | 1 | 2016-02-26 17:12 | aboges26 | #GEOG4320 #TTU #youthmappers |
| 37451096 by aboges26 @ 2016-02-26 03:01 | 1 | 2016-02-26 17:12 | aboges26 | #GEOG4320 #TTU #youthmappers |
| 37451533 by aboges26 @ 2016-02-26 03:33 | 1 | 2016-02-26 17:12 | aboges26 | #GEOG4320 #TTU #youthmappers |
| 37452234 by aboges26 @ 2016-02-26 04:27 | 1 | 2016-02-26 17:12 | aboges26 | #GEOG4320 #TTU #youthmappers |
| 37452283 by aboges26 @ 2016-02-26 04:34 | 1 | 2016-02-26 17:11 | aboges26 | #GEOG4320 #TTU #youthmappers |
| 37452480 by aboges26 @ 2016-02-26 05:01 | 1 | 2016-02-26 17:11 | aboges26 | #GEOG4320 #TTU #youthmappers |
| 37452529 by aboges26 @ 2016-02-26 05:12 | 1 | 2016-02-26 17:11 | aboges26 | #GEOG4320 #TTU #youthmappers |
| 37452668 by aboges26 @ 2016-02-26 05:34 | 1 | 2016-02-26 17:11 | aboges26 | #GEOG4320 #TTU #youthmappers |
| 30605198 by aboges26 @ 2015-04-29 05:02 | 1 | 2015-04-29 05:05 | aboges26 | The new frontage roads for the Marsha Sharp Freeway/Brownfield Highway have been constructed. As such, both the eastbound and westbound US 62/82 traffic has been switched onto them. The old lanes have been demolished to make way for the freeway lanes and bridges. |