Changeset No. Date Contributor Comment
12017-06-21 07:32:09 UTCmanoharuss Hi rlittle08,

Welcome to OpenStreetMap. Your interest in contributing to the map. I have observed that you have changed the school name. Are you sure this is correct, is there a way one can verify this change?
Asking, as this school's name did not change in a long time.

Thank you,

22017-06-22 19:16:42 UTCfreebeer Hi,
A quick googling showed both names at this address, but that the Elementary school closed in 2008, shortly after the import into OSM which has remained untouched. Therefore I am tempted to accept this change as reasonable, limiting myself to the two CA Dept of Ed results and not bothering with...
12017-04-28 05:45:05 UTCnammala Hi AT84,

Welcome and thanks for contributing to OpenStreetMap (OSM). OSM is the real map of the world and every data is very valuable. May I know the reason behind deleting highways and also adding `waterway=pond` to the `park` tag is not a valid one. Could you please make those changes please.
22017-04-28 06:28:56 UTCAT84 Nammala,
I very much do understand that every piece of data is valuable to OSM, which is why I'm providing it with the latest data of the Village of Maxwell. I am on the local board as a landscaper, and the board has recently been asking, "How can we get word out about Maxwell?", so upda...
32017-04-28 06:46:56 UTCnammala Thanks AT84 for getting back . Like the way you have mentioned each and every point clearly. Happy mapping.
Let me know if I can help you in any way.

Best Regards,
42017-04-28 19:25:59 UTCfreebeer Hi. Maxwell? Hmmm.
I'm taking a look at the area to see if I can help, and how I can avoid doing too much damage.
If the roads/paths are presently impassable due to rain, I would not delete anything, but at best, mark with appropriate access tags. After all, I spend a lot of time in the sun at ...
52017-04-28 22:33:11 UTCfreebeer I know it's rude to reply to myself, but here are my thoughts:
The roads should not have been deleted, but instead retagged as not-residential. They look like the paths I walk to my Sometimes-Underwater Spot. Which paths are, at times, impassable for me, but that is not marked as such. At other ...
12017-04-25 13:54:41 UTCchadbunn There is newer inamgery for this area than Bing and Mapbox. Local Utah imagery from 2016 and there is most definitely a park here. I will capture with Mapillary today. In the future please refrain from deleting before you have contacted me about an error in this area.
22017-04-25 13:58:05 UTCpoornibadrinath Hi,
Yeah, sorry about that. I deleted thinking it was not there, but very quickly realised that I had made a mistake. I am trying to revert my chnageset, but somehow it was not happening. I will revert my changeset. Thanks for notifying me about this.
32017-04-25 14:01:05 UTCchadbunn Here is proof of the building:

I appreciate the interest in this area, but do you have any local knowledge of Layton, UT or are you just doing ...
42017-04-25 14:09:21 UTCchadbunn NAIP Imagery from earlier this month also indicates a building here. Even Google Maps or Earth clearly indicate a building here. If you are unable to revert I will just add it back in.
52017-04-25 14:17:26 UTCpoornibadrinath Hi,
Thanks for all the clarification. I realised it when I checked it myself the second time. I was verifying newly added parks due to random edits by new mappers. Since Bing and Mapbox both didn't show the park and the park changeset had the imagery source listed as Bing, I deleted it as I could...
62017-04-25 20:30:06 UTCchadbunn This building has been verified on Mapillary.
72017-04-26 06:50:18 UTCpoornibadrinath Right, got it. Got it verified on the most recent Mapbox satellite imagery as well. The changeset has been reverted: Thanks for bringing this to my notice.
82017-04-26 20:23:03 UTCmvexel chadbunn, do you have JOSM configured to use Utah AGRC imagery? I have tried and failed :( I would love to be able to use it in JOSM!
92017-04-27 03:56:04 UTCfreebeer Just to butt in, without knowing the contents of the other imagery sources, I can verify that both building and park are present in the (degraded) USGS Large Scale Imagery background in Potlatch2, although only at zoom levels 16 and server-side scaled to zoom 20, with nothing for me from 17-19 here....
12017-04-26 06:33:55 UTCupendrakarukonda Hi octants,

Welcome to OpenStreetMap. According to imagery I can't see soccer pitch here Landuse and leisure tags can't be given to one feature. Can you check this?


22017-04-26 07:41:22 UTCfreebeer I can clearly see that there is a soccer pitch in Bing zoomlevel 20 aerial orthophotos. The user has mapped the pitch outlines a bit too far north and likely too narrow to render with field markings on . At the same time I can see an unmarked pitch visible to the northeast on the ...
32017-04-26 11:47:20 UTCupendrakarukonda Thank you Freebeer for clarification .
42017-04-26 20:47:34 UTCfreebeer To followup to meself...
I chose to not adjust anything, as I saw the net distance is some 69 metres, while seems to first want to add pitch markings from 80 (or 90?)m. It would not surprise me if there is a sub-regulation size pitch in use at elementary schools like here, but not being fam...
12017-04-20 12:58:36 UTCfreebeer Howdy Ms/Mr O. Ranch,
Good to see you have not abandoned OSM and have in fact tagged The Big Barn. I recommend to add names to as many things as possible, since I've done my experiments and tried to clean up my preposterous placeholders.
In my Easter mythmapping, I collected a number of i...
12017-04-04 06:07:29 UTCnammala Hi Oil Ranch,

Welcome and thanks for contributing to OpenStreetMap (OSM). OSM is the real map of the world and the data we add should be ground truth please don't add fantasy data and the names to the name tag. I have reverted your changeset. Please let me know if you need anything regarding mapp...
22017-04-04 12:30:31 UTCOil Ranch Hello. Will you please expound on what data was deemed fantasy and what tag was inaccurately populated? Intent was the truth, but perhaps I misapplied some construct? Any help in better understanding what was done incorrectly is appreciated. Kindest regards.
32017-04-04 12:39:37 UTCnammala The park you have added doesn't seem to be present in the ground and OSM is the data which is ground truth. and also the name of the park, May I know the reason behind doing it
42017-04-04 14:41:27 UTCOil Ranch Thanks for your response. Perhaps I mislabeled it "park"? The Oil Ranch is working ranch that is an theme/amusement park for families, educational field trips, and events like birthday parties and reunions. You can see the entrance at,-95.8246921,3a...
52017-04-14 10:57:31 UTCfreebeer Greetings Oil Ranch,
I see no reason for the full revert that was carried out based on what was clearly simple mis-tagging of a theme_park tourism tag.
I took the opportunity to trace some simple rectangular building outlines in and around your theme park to try and fill in the copious whi...
12017-03-01 23:22:00 UTCfreebeer Vandalism -- This and most if not all other changesets from this user should be reverted, look in this area for more similar vandalism
12017-02-11 13:17:09 UTCRini1 Hallo halli 77
Du gibst einem Haus in der Friedhofstr. in Lauchringen die Nummer 1.
In Map4 BW ( ist das die Nummer 5. Die Karte ist nicht zu 100% genau.Bitte gib mir eine Rückmeldung, Wichtig dabei wäre deine Quelle.
Grüße aus Rheinheim
22017-02-23 19:52:10 UTCfreebeer Halli halloo 1. Rini
Die Hausnummern 5-7c stimmen.
Quelle: Worn-out shoes and worn-out eyeballs
Greetings from Rheinheim -- no, wait, I had to move away, far away. Narri narro
freebeer has contributed to 8 changeset discussions(s) with a total of 29 comment(s)