Changeset No. Date Contributor Comment
12017-04-23 08:16:23 UTCwoodpeck What is wrong with you? For the third time now I have asked you to explain why you consider this to "not be a park" when the Long Beach municipal web site clearly lists it as a park - and you would think they should know better, no?
22017-04-28 23:20:14 UTCthomaswest7891 this was put as a park, someone with out being named wants the game pokemon go to spawn more pokemon. it is just a grassy area not a park.
32017-04-29 16:25:20 UTCwoodpeck Ok I'll use simpler language. This area was put as a park. Because it is a park. The City of Long Beach thinks this is a park. They have a description of this park on their web site. Many parks are really just grassy areas. But this grassy area is a park. Please leave it.
42017-04-29 16:29:54 UTCwoodpeck_repair This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 48260079 where the changeset comment is: Revert vandalism
12017-04-28 22:02:23 UTCRichRico Hi Woodpeck_repair, thanks for contibuting with osm.
I found a edition in one of your changeset, you modified the tag of a bridge `bridge = yes` and `bridge:sctructure=suspension` by just `bridge=suspension` acording the wiki the previous edition is correct.
maybe you have another explication
22017-04-29 16:22:11 UTCwoodpeck The problem is that someone simply hit the "fix everything" button on the JOSM validator for a very large number of items. While this did probably do the right thing in many cases, it also did the wrong thing in many cases. The JOSM validator is not a tool to be used indiscriminately like ...
12017-04-21 15:39:32 UTCwoodpeck_repair This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 48007226 where the changeset comment is: revert changeset that accidentally moved many nodes by more than 100km
22017-04-24 08:30:43 UTCpfg21 The transfer of points was meaningful, all objects after editing locally validated, and any errors found corrected. Asked to cancel the rollback edits.
32017-04-24 08:32:32 UTCpfg21 The map after edits in fully working state
42017-04-24 09:01:59 UTCwoodpeck The move of the nodes in this changeset was clearly a mistake and has temporarily led to a broken map display. See http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/47972480.png for an illustration.
52017-04-26 08:24:23 UTCpfg21 I always check the result of my actions in josm.
the error that shows in the picture, sometimes because of problems in the servers of OSM.
Mapnik when updating the tiles gets to the time when the position of points are changed, but the points still belong to the old lines.
If you send /dirty a wh...
62017-04-26 08:32:24 UTCwoodpeck Are you saying that you have re-used node IDs for something entirely different in another area?
72017-04-26 09:09:36 UTCpfg21 Yeah, that happens sometimes
82017-04-27 07:38:51 UTCwoodpeck 1. You shouldn't do that (re-use node IDs), 2. here's the Achavi link that shows the broken changeset: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=47972480 - this is not a temporary rendering problem, at least three ways were totally broken in your changeset.
12017-04-25 21:05:05 UTCwoodpeck Please observe the following rules:
1. Do not put advertising copy in your changeset comment. A good changeset comment is "added Qtrust insurance", not what you wrote here.
2. Do not put advertising copy in the "description" tag or any other tag for that matter.
3. If you uplo...
12017-04-23 09:25:59 UTCwoodpeck Sebastic, if you delete polygons and someone else undoes your deletion, the correct approach is to discuss the issue, not stubbornly delete them again.
22017-04-23 09:48:10 UTCKostik https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=6129&p=120
32017-04-23 09:55:36 UTCKostik Do not remove the relationship 3767168, 3767169 and the like!
42017-04-23 09:56:31 UTCKostik 3919370, 3919098
52017-04-23 10:17:54 UTCKostik 4471401
62017-04-23 10:23:28 UTCKostik 5372735
72017-04-23 11:18:02 UTCsebastic Please give these relations proper tags so that they don't qualify as old-style multipolygons.
82017-04-23 14:40:01 UTCKostik Before removing something, a good tone to write to the author of editing.
92017-04-23 14:42:42 UTCKostik Is the tag "note" not enough for you?
102017-04-23 14:52:47 UTCKostik I added a tag to the "note:de" for more of your understanding.
112017-04-23 15:31:03 UTCsebastic Neither the "note" nor "note:de" tag is sufficient to not have those relations be considered old-style multipolygons.

If you want to keep those relations in OpenStreetMap you should improve their tagging so they are not considered old-style multipolygons.

I'm not german BTW...
122017-04-23 16:28:04 UTCKostik If you do not want to roll back your vandal corrections, do not touch my relations.
132017-04-23 17:28:15 UTCsebastic If you don't want people to touch your relations, they shouldn't be in the OSM database that anyone with an account can edit. They should live in your own system to which only you have access.
12017-04-23 08:42:52 UTCwoodpeck Can you explain why you reverted this edit? Did it break anything or was it otherwise wrong? Please make it a habit to explain such things directly in the changeset comment when you revert something unless it is totally obvious.
22017-04-23 09:43:42 UTCKostik Были удалены отношения которые не стоило удалять. Причём без должного комментария почему это было сделано. Я вернул нужные мне мультиполигоны.

Relations have been removed are no...
12017-04-14 17:36:34 UTCrgt there are multiple references to this being a park on the internet so actually it is
22017-04-18 22:43:07 UTCiMarbot @rgt they are a malicious account. Look at their change history.
32017-04-19 15:45:35 UTCwoodpeck Curt, could you explain why you believe this is not a park. I found this on the web http://www.longbeach.gov/park/park-and-facilities/directory/marina-green/ which seems to say that at leas the city of Long Beach believes it is a park.
12017-04-19 13:49:07 UTCwoodpeck You appear to have deleted a lot of data in this and other nearby changesets. May I ask why?
12017-04-07 12:08:33 UTCDaveF Hi ti-lo
I've notice you've changed shop=motorcycle_repair to shop=motorcycle
What source did you use to ascertain they sell motorcycles?
22017-04-07 13:43:08 UTCti-lo A shop=motorcycle doesn't have to sell motorcycles. It's possible they repair, sell tyres, clothes or other stuff. To enable frontends to filter this, I'm standardizing the key. This means the "main" category is "shop", the "subcategories" motorcycle *:* (called "s...
32017-04-07 20:27:39 UTCDaveF Even if the revised tagging system is adopted (Was there any discussion?) you haven't confirmed whether it sells motorcycles or not.
42017-04-07 21:37:11 UTCti-lo I'not sure whether I get the point.
Which discussion do you mean, this one ?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/service:bicycle
And do you mean I should confirm whether this shop sells motorcycles ?
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3179844246
(can't do that as my crystal bal...
52017-04-07 22:06:40 UTCDaveF I'm unsure why you don't get my point.
Was it discussed on https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/ ?

"can't do that as my crystal ball is broken" < this is the problem. You've edited a tag from being correct to incorrect without any knowledge.
According to you're wiki ed...
62017-04-08 14:13:35 UTCti-lo Hi Dave,
the former tagging was :
name \tPete Robson
service \tMOT_motorcycle
shop \tmotorcycle_repair
Now it is :
motorcycle:repair \tyes
name \tPete Robson
service \tMOT_motorcycle
shop \tmotorcycle

The description of shop=motorcycle
says since 15 August 2010 :
"A shop that sell...
72017-04-08 14:47:36 UTCDaveF Hi
"as I can't say whether it (meanwhile) possibly sells used bikes." < Again, this is the problem. You've explicitly changed it from 'definitely doesn't sell bikes' to 'definitely does sell bikes' *without* any knowledge.
82017-04-08 15:17:30 UTCti-lo Hi Dave, I'm not sure whether you read my answers. The description of shop=motorcycle INCLUDES REPAIR SINCE 2010 : "A shop that sells motorcycles and/or related accessories, clothes, parts, repair and rental services."
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dmotorcycle
So this is ...
92017-04-08 15:40:46 UTCDaveF Hi
if I were in your position I wouldn't have made the amendments due to lack of *any* knowledge to justify the changes. Your last sentence confirms why.

shop=motorcycle_repair means it doesn't sell bikes. You've now made it, at best, ambiguous.
102017-04-08 16:18:26 UTCti-lo In my point of view it's just another way to express the same thing (and to enable people to tag further properties of the item).
It would be great if you'd propose how to solve this (in your point of view) "issue" instead of keeping on complaining. In the last seven years there would hav...
112017-04-10 11:25:01 UTCDaveF As explained previously you've change the meaning of the entity, not provided an alternative.

There is no 'issue' to solve. The entity was accurately & legitimately tagged before your amendments.
As you've no knowledge of this shop you should not have made any changes.

I'm 'complaining' b...
122017-04-10 18:28:01 UTCti-lo What do you think about that ?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:shop%3Dmotorcycle_repair
132017-04-10 19:24:36 UTCti-lo Would you please add your concerns to the discussion page ? (So everyone may add his/her point of view) :
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:shop%3Dmotorcycle
142017-04-10 20:38:35 UTCDaveF What are your plans to revert your erroneous edits?

PS
"These SHOULD be proposed on the tagging group!!! Not proposed on a wiki page."
152017-04-12 07:15:43 UTCwoodpeck The bulk of ti-lo's motorcycle adjustments have been reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/47664678 and I recommended that a discussion is held on the tagging mailing list before changes are re-introduced.
162017-04-12 10:12:41 UTCDaveF @ti-lo
I look forward discussing your proposal on the Tagging mailing list.
12017-04-10 20:05:30 UTCstreckenkundler Bitte Edit sofort stoppen und im Forum disskutieren:

https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=640665#p640665
22017-04-11 10:41:53 UTCFahRadler Hi,
habs gerade gelesen.
CS ist kommentiert.
KEIN mech. edit !
Basis sind dooleys Listen und Wikipedia mit den offiziellen Namen.

FahRadler
32017-04-11 11:22:00 UTCstreckenkundler Ich sehe das anders... Vor allem aber auch weil die Changesets nicht räumlich begrenzt sind, habe ich auch ein Problem damit. Gängige Tools wie achavi oder History-Viewer steigen bei diesen aus. Eine Kontrolle ist nicht möglich.

Oder kannst du an einen DSL-Hauptverteiler einn Brief...
42017-04-11 11:31:57 UTCNakaner Hallo FahRadler,

ein mechanischer Edit muss nicht zwangsläufig automatisiert erfolgen. Es genügt eine größere Menge Objekte in JOSM zu ändern, ohne jedes einzelne Objekt zu prüfen. Die von streckenkundler aufgezeigten Beispiele belegen das. Siehe dazu auch https://w...
52017-04-11 11:32:54 UTCwoodpeck streckenkundler hat recht; die genannten Beispiele sind klare Indizien für einen "mechanischen Edit". Der liegt auch dann vor, wenn man z.B. in JOSM alles sucht, was "addr:city=a" hat, und das durch "addr:city=b" ersetzt. Überlasse doch diese Korrekturen Leute...
62017-04-11 11:33:31 UTCwoodpeck Ups, jetzt hat Nakaner fast das gleiche geschrieben und war auch noch früher dran.
72017-04-11 13:37:54 UTCFahRadler wie im Formum beschrieben änderte ich die addr:city Fehler die auf OSMsuspect gelistet wurden.
Meine manuelle Vorgehensweise habe ich geschildert.
Sicher wäre es schön alle "Fehler" (Adressen auf DSL-Hauptverteiler, Parkplatz) zu beseitigen. Mein Fokus in der Bearbeitung l...
12017-04-04 08:46:23 UTCwoodpeck Hello Zowie Polie, this changeset deletes a lot of valid data. Maybe you are not aware that your edits actually affect every user of OSM, not just the map you are seeing. Please stop breaking the map.
12017-03-28 22:10:36 UTCwoodpeck In this changeset you fixed the coastline of Gosti island, but there is a lot of extremely jagged other coastline nearby that you did not touch. May I ask why you focussed on this one island? Have you made this edit as part of a MapRoulette task, and if yes, have you been instructed by anyone to do...
22017-03-30 02:39:36 UTCJason Roy I focused on Gosti Island because I found it through a Maproulette challenge designed to find jagged islands that can use better alignment. I am part of a small group of OSM users working on improving these islands.
12017-03-28 22:07:47 UTCwoodpeck You have moved the nodes making up this island http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/224776118 but neither Bing nor Mapbox imagery actually are good enough to even see that island. Your source specification ("Bing") must have been a mistake. Can you clarify your source? Have you made this edit ...
22017-03-30 02:22:06 UTCKate Diaz You are right, I should not have moved the nodes making up that island. It is simply not visible in Bing or Mapbox. Please observe that I made these edits 6 days ago, and since then I have avoided making similar edits when no imagery is available. I certainly won’t any more. I am finding these...
12017-03-28 22:01:06 UTCwoodpeck You aligned this island with Bing but you left the nearby, larger island untouched even though it, too, is very much out of sync with imagery. Why the focus on this one island? Have you made this edit as part of a MapRoulette task, and if yes, have you been instructed by anyone to do this?
22017-03-30 02:36:07 UTCShaun Austin I am finding these islands through a MapRoulette challenge. I did not fix the other island because it may be another task and I wanted to save it for others working on the challenge.
12017-03-28 21:56:27 UTCwoodpeck You modified this island but left the glacier in place that now cuts right through the island which can't be right. Why the focus on just the island geometry? Have you made this edit as part of a MapRoulette task, and if yes, have you been instructed by anyone to do this?
22017-03-30 03:39:50 UTCEvelyn Desouzaa Hey Woodpeck,




Thanks for pointing that out, I have since fixed the glacier feature to not intersect the island.  This edit was made as part of a MapRoulette challenge for Island and Shoreline alignment.  There's is a small group of us working on fixing small islands in OSM. &nb...
12017-03-28 21:54:59 UTCwoodpeck You claim to have used Bing imagery for this changeset, but Bing imagery just shows a blurry cloud of white and you can't even see that there's supposed to be an island here so the source specification must have been a mistake. Can you clarify your source? Have you made this edit as part of a MapRou...
22017-03-30 23:39:12 UTCAshley Rose There's some rock visible in Bing here. Its not unreasonable to assume that the blurry rock seen in imagery is the same feature represented by the existing island (w232976567), so I tried to improve the island with Bing. However you are right that I should not have edited this island with only Bing....
12017-03-28 21:53:39 UTCwoodpeck You have improved the coastline for this island, but there's an out-of-sync admin boundary half overlapping the island. Did you notice that? It would have been good if, while modifying the island, you had corrected the admin boundary as well. (Admin boundaries are broken all over the place but if yo...
22017-03-30 02:30:14 UTCEva Blue I noticed the admin boundary, but I was under the impression that these features should only be edited with special resources, especially because they are not visible in imagery. I think that if I was in the habit of editing admin boundaries using only Bing and Mapbox, other OSM users would rightly ...
12017-03-28 21:50:36 UTCwoodpeck You have aligned this one island with Bing imagery, but the three nearby islands were horribly out of sync with imagery and you haven't even made an attempt to repair them too. Why the focus on this one island? Have you made this edit as part of a MapRoulette task, and if yes, have you been instruct...
22017-03-30 02:43:25 UTCJames Millar I found this island through a MapRoulette challenge, I’m part of a small group who are attempting to improve the alignment of these islands using MapRoulette and JOSM.
32017-04-18 10:15:59 UTCSomeoneElse Hi James.
There have been worrying changes such as this elsewhere; you simply can't rely on Bing imagery where it might be offset (which is anywhere that you don't have something else to corroborate it).
Can you explain who the "small group" are?
Your profile doesn't say anything abou...
42017-04-19 02:09:13 UTCJames Millar Hi Andy,
We also use Mapbox, and by using a combination we can usually make improvements to these islands regardless of potential Bing offset. Alternatively we make the decision to not make any edits in an area (we do this often). Can you point me to some of the worrying changes? I can always fix t...
52017-04-19 07:58:14 UTCSomeoneElse Re "worrying changes", you can see a discussion with comments at http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/imagico/diary/40759 .
Also, you're saying "we" again. Who exactly are "we"?
Best Regards,
Andy
12017-03-28 21:48:52 UTCwoodpeck You have neatly aligned this island with the imagery, but you left the jagged 6-node form of the other nearby Roberts Island unchanged. Why the focus on this one particular island, instead of repairing other things that catch your eye too? Have you made this edit as part of a MapRoulette task, and ...
22017-03-30 02:16:12 UTCkevin Prince Thank you for the compliment, these types of islands are sometimes tough to align because MHWS is not clear in the imagery. Yes, I am using a MapRoulette challenge in order to find these islands, then using JOSM to align the islands with Bing and Mapbox. I did not edit the other island because I tho...
12017-03-28 21:46:13 UTCwoodpeck You have aligned this island to Bing imagery but the nearby coastline, which is equally out of sync, has not been touched by you. Why the focus on this island? Have you made this edit as part of a MapRoulette task, and if yes, have you been instructed by anyone to do this?
22017-03-30 03:34:08 UTCJones Sandy Hello,



My edit was confined to the island using Bing imagery as a source because I was focusing on island geometry per a MR task.  We’re a small team working on fixing island geometry.  

Thank you.

12017-03-28 21:41:58 UTCwoodpeck You claim to have used Bing imagery for this changeset, but Bing imagery is too blurry to discern the shape that you have drawn so the source specification must have been a mistake. Can you clarify your source? Have you made this edit as part of a MapRoulette task, and if yes, have you been instruct...
22017-03-30 03:32:18 UTCEdward Munch Hi Woodpeck,

Bing imagery was the correct source.  It’s not great, but the resolution was good enough to make improvements to the really angular island geometry that existed prior to my edit.  There is a small group of us working on tasks like this from MapRoulette focusing on sma...
12017-03-28 21:39:23 UTCwoodpeck You claim to have used Bing imagery for this changeset, but Bing imagery in this area is so cloudy that the island shape cannot be discerned, so the source specification must have been a mistake. Can you clarify your source? Have you made this edit as part of a MapRoulette task, and if yes, have you...
22017-03-30 03:35:43 UTCBecca Wilson Hello Woodpeck,

Bing is okay in this area, but it is a little hard to determine the extent of the island due to the ice.  I aligned the island as best I could and removed the simplified geometry which originally existed. You can check out my edit here: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?ch...
12017-03-28 21:37:00 UTCwoodpeck You fixed this island's coastline in this changeset, but you did not change anything about the nearby other coastlines which were equally imprecise. May I ask what was your workflow here - why were you interested in this one island but completely ignorant of the data around it? Have you made this ed...
22017-03-30 19:06:13 UTCSandro Alex Hi Woodpeck,

My workflow was based on fixing tasks from a MapRoulette challenge for Islands and Shorelines, which is why my focus was on a single feature rather than the entire area.  There is a small group of us working on fixing the geometry of islands in OSM.  Thanks!
12017-03-28 21:31:17 UTCwoodpeck You claim to have aligned something to Bing in this changeset, but neither Bing nor Mapbox imagery show anything else than a large blurred area here, certainly nothing from which one could move a node. The source specification must have been a mistake. Can you clarify your source? Have you made this...
22017-03-30 19:03:38 UTCJenny Johal Hi Woodpeck,

This changeset was a single upload from an edit I made on the entire island feature as seen in this changeset view: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=47222149, where I aligned the entire island to Bing.  It’s blurry, but I felt the imagery is good enough to ma...
12017-03-28 21:27:32 UTCwoodpeck Hi, you have modified a large number of buildings that had been tagged "area=yes" and you put "building=yes" instead. However the Mapbox imagery you are using shows many more buildings in the area. May I ask why you chose to edit the existing buildings but not to add the missing ...
22017-03-30 01:34:15 UTCLexi Johnson Hi Woodpeck. These are buildings and area=yes is meaningless without other tags: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:area. I'm doing the second step of the HOT Tasking Manager process, which is after someone marks a square as “done” then others double check the “done” task...
12017-03-28 21:21:49 UTCwoodpeck You claim to have used Bing imagery for this changeset, but Bing imagery just shows a blurry cloud of white and you can't even see that there's supposed to be an island here so the source specification must have been a mistake. Can you clarify your source? Have you made this edit as part of a MapRou...
22017-03-30 19:07:21 UTCPhilip Guston Hi Woodpeck,

The source for my edit was indeed Bing, though I recognize it’s not the best quality.  I rounded out the small island per what I could see in imagery, and felt that was an improvement to the previous geometry.  There is a small group of us fixing island geometry in Ma...
12017-03-18 08:55:18 UTCwoodpeck Hello, may I inquire about the source of these added POIs? You have added a bunch of restaurants, cafes and gift shops across the planet, without names or specifying where the data came from.
12017-03-16 22:37:36 UTCwoodpeck Hi jcaviborg, it appears that this change set touches a lot of objects without actually changing them (other than the source tag is removed from the objects). What does that mean? Just to pick an example, on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/220619614/history you remove "source=bing", and ...
22017-03-17 06:39:42 UTCosmviborg All objects are compared against "GeoDanmark Ortofoto". Ortofoto are aerial photos of Denmark taken on yearly basis.
12017-03-12 22:00:10 UTCSomeoneElse Relation 7066589 has 37,948 nodes as members. It's just broken an osm2pgsql import here, and I suspect I wont be the only one.

What is it actually supposed to be?
22017-03-12 22:18:07 UTCwoodpeck I have also noticed that this import seems to have first been raised on talk-br on March 9, two days before the import was started. Problems like a collection relation with 37k members would have been found before the import if people had actually had time to look at what was proposed.
32017-03-12 22:21:56 UTCwoodpeck The survey points seem to contain this message: "Não alterar: coordenadas originais do IBGE". I wonder why they are imported in OSM at all; what use is data that you cannot alter in OSM? Anyone interested in doing anything with the survey points can just use the shape file.
42017-03-12 22:24:37 UTCpnorman Hello,

Imports in OSM are subject to some requirements (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines), one of which the community is consulted prior to the import, including the imports@ mailing list.

Because this import is causing technical problems and has not been discussed, I'm go...
52017-03-12 22:29:36 UTCsmaprs Ok, if you think its' better to revert it. We discussed it in Brazilian community thinking these survey points have precise coordinates and can help align imagery in remote regions of Brazil. I'll read carefully your remarks and see what can be done better.
62017-03-12 22:39:38 UTCwoodpeck I have looked that the Bing imagery surrounding some of the points and found nothing visible on the ground that I could have used to align the image though. I think the matter deserves a more thorough discussion. We'll revert it for now but that doesn't mean it can never come back.
72017-03-12 22:51:03 UTCsmaprs Ok. Sorry for the unexpected problems.
12017-03-09 20:57:54 UTCwoodpeck This import is badly executed. In blatant contravention to the RABA-KGZ import page on the Wiki, polygons have NOT been combined with neighbouring ones (e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/479459103 ends clearly at a grid boundary), and data has NOT been visually compared with existing stuff (see...
22017-03-10 15:38:22 UTCPeter_Klofutar_import I've been working on that since. Please review and let me know, if you find any other inconsistencies.
12017-02-09 13:21:13 UTCShinigami Hello Frederik,

I just found you have rolled back hours of my work, when I merged loots of little counties to big polygones with same timezone. Unfortunately you did not revert those countries infos, so big part of the USA is without timezone data now.

Ad mapping of timezones - borders of cou...
22017-02-09 14:06:38 UTCwoodpeck Admin boundaries and maybe sometimes post code boundaries are the big exceptions; their presence in OSM doesn't mean that we can now map any kind of boundaries that are not visible or verifiable on the ground! This just doesn't scale - we can't add all boundaries that someone might find interesting ...
32017-02-09 14:32:15 UTCShinigami Having tons of small polygons tagged with TZ instead of one big does not scale too.. And local time is not something one might find interesting but really important thing. It is common in US, that half of state have one TZ, other second. It means tens of counties with one, tens with other. And borde...
42017-02-10 09:31:38 UTCShinigami Could you please rollback your changes?
52017-02-10 11:06:13 UTCwoodpeck I have reverted my deletions. I still believe it's wrong to map time zones, and all time zone boundaries in OSM should be deleted, but I agree it was premature to delete them nilly-willy. I will bring this matter up for discussion on the tagging mailing list. Please join me there.
62017-03-07 06:46:15 UTCwoodpeck I have started a discussion on the tagging mailing list: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2017-March/031453.html
12017-02-28 19:59:43 UTCwoodpeck How did you manage to draw this building outline with 40 points when all that the Bing imagery shows is a construction site? Is it possible that you forgot to specify a data source?
22017-02-28 20:58:02 UTCaccay Hi,
This a high residential towers that have been developed a few years back. The footprint is exactly what it looks like and this area is develop ed now. The bings imagery is like 10 years old i think. Thats why it is showing a construction site.

The source is land surveyw done by the local sur...
12017-02-28 19:57:51 UTCwoodpeck Could you please explain the source of this data. It appears that you have added a large number of buildings, but forgot to tag them correctly. You've also added a large number of duplicate nodes. It looks like this might be an import that is not following our imports policy http://wiki.openstreetma...
22017-02-28 20:52:24 UTCaccay Hi Woodpeck,

Thank you for the comments.
I am a GIS analyst working at the local goverment authority who is the master planner and developer of this city. Our corporation is called HDC ( 100% goverment). www.hdc.com.mv
Our data is sourced through land and topographic surveys, demarcation surve...
12017-02-27 13:51:02 UTCwoodpeck I'm afraid I will have to remove these imports because they haven't been discussed with the community (as mandated by the import policy), and (probably as a consequence of such lack of discussion) are faulty, using invalid tags and duplicating information that already is in OSM.
12017-02-20 23:16:00 UTCwoodpeck Oh dear, this changeset and the few others you uploaded at the same time have actually *duplicated* almost all the data in the city - now your new data sits on top of the unchanged old data. I think we should remove your new data again, to give you a chance to properly conflate your changes with the...
22017-02-25 00:41:21 UTCcelayer how can i fix the issue ?
32017-02-25 09:25:18 UTCwoodpeck You would have to download the area (or parts of it at at time) into JOSM and then manually delete the duplicate data.

Or, if you want I could simply revert the whole changeset in which you uploaded the duplicate data, and then you could go through your improvements offline and add them piece by ...
42017-02-27 18:51:34 UTCcelayer thank you for explanation Woodpeck
i prefer to do revert for whole changeset.
thank you !
12017-02-21 22:07:15 UTCwoodpeck Importing Canvec data requires some diligence. You cannot just take a Canvec tile and dump it into OSM (else others would have done it long ago). You need to compare Canvec data to existing data or even aerial imagery to make sure you're not making the map worse. See for example https://www.openstre...
22017-02-21 22:13:29 UTCwoodpeck It appears you have imported a new road over an already existing road here https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/476144200#map=18/49.12053/-70.11346&layers=D and tagged the new road with "lanes=-1"?
32017-02-22 12:01:57 UTCLogicalViolinist I'll fix it up, not sure why JOSM didnt catch that error, I might have to reset my settings.
42017-02-22 12:24:24 UTCLogicalViolinist both instances have been fixed. will check if there's anymore data that had already been added that is overlapping
12017-02-17 13:19:26 UTCwoodpeck Hello, in this changeset you deleted y couple of buildings and your comment says that you deleted them because they are in a security area. However, OSM does not generally respect specific national security interests with regards to mapping. If a building is visible on aerial imagery, then it may be...
12017-02-16 10:47:57 UTCwoodpeck Wie hast Du entschieden, welche Objekte ein "beacon:type=vor-dme" bekommen? Hast Du hierzu eine externe Quelle verwendet, oder Dich rein auf existierende OSM-Tags verlassen? Hast Du jedes einzelne Objekt bei OSM angeschaut, das Du bearbeitet hast? Hast Du diesen mechanischen Edit vorher mi...
22017-02-17 06:48:27 UTCgeozeisig Ich habe mich rein auf die schon existierenden OSM-Tags bezogen. Ja, ich habe die Objekte einzeln bearbeitet. (Bei manchen war die Frequenz in kHz statt MHz angegeben, bei anderen fehlte die Einheit)
12017-02-15 13:15:31 UTCwoodpeck Hello HourOfTheWulf, it is interesting how you're adding 9 playgrounds across all of Holland. Have you recently been on a nationwide playground survey trip, or what is the source of this data?
22017-02-15 21:20:09 UTCmarczoutendijk Recently the Dutch Community has been flooded with user notes pointing to either Playgrounds or Mailboxes.
There has been quiet some discussion on the Dutch Forum about how to handle this:
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=57192.
With respect to Mailboxes it was agreed NOT to accep...
32017-02-17 10:21:44 UTCligfietser Those playgrounds are probably marked by Pokemon Go players. Those notes appear are all over the place like mushrooms.
12017-02-07 14:41:07 UTCsbiribizio Hi,
why did you delete in Casale Monferrato the small landuse=residential and create a big landuse=residential instead?
Your big landuse have inside it some landuse=playground, streets, pitch, etc.
This mapping is not accurate.
Please revert your changes or I'll do it for you.
Thanks
22017-02-07 17:01:07 UTCdieterdreist generally, please do not create big landuse areas with a lot of different stuff in it (especially do not create a single landuse=residential around a village, use place areas for this). Thank you.
32017-02-07 19:29:54 UTCFredie hm.
Is there a common agreement ?
Do you have a link ?
I haven't seen an area tagging for residential anywhere else, yet.
problem encountered on huge landuse ?
Can't see one up today ?
Inform me, please ?
42017-02-07 22:12:20 UTCwoodpeck Hello Fredie, of course if you map new things then you get to decide how you map them; a large landuse area for a whole village or smaller areas - no problem. But you should not delete the work that others have done and replace it with "your style". Also, your changeset deletes a large num...
52017-02-08 07:07:31 UTCFredie you are right
I'll take consequences from this
I'll explain to sbiririzio personally
62017-02-08 07:45:39 UTCsbiribizio Personally you explained to me that:
"I've deleted your post without reading"
I explained in detail my complaints, why don't discuss?
I asked gently for proofs of your work.
No aswer from you.
72017-02-09 11:42:09 UTCdieterdreist for reference, there is also a thread on talk-it about this: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-it/2017-February/057032.html
82017-02-09 12:00:47 UTCdieterdreist In one of your replies to sbiribizio you (Fredie) have written a lot of alternative facts, which I will comment here:

> All my work is carefully researched used sat data from
> 2016. If you use Bing Sat data make clear that those are pretty > 6
> years old.


Who is the copyright...
92017-02-09 16:27:05 UTCFredie agree
12017-01-29 08:56:19 UTCNakaner-repair This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 45614261 where the changeset comment is: Revert vandalism (propably Pokémon edits). See https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2016/12/30/tips-pokemon-go/ how you should edit OpenStreetMap and why you should not add fictional data!
22017-01-29 08:59:56 UTCNakaner Hallo karottenjunge1,

ich habe dir gestern Vormittag geschrieben, dass deine Beiträge in der Form, wie du sie derzeit hochlädst, bei uns unerwünscht sind. Wir erfassen nur real existierende Dinge. Einträge, die nur darauf abzielen, Pokémons anzulocken werden gelösc...
32017-02-04 06:41:20 UTCkarottenjunge1 Dieser markierte Park existiert wirklich. Dort steht ein Kriegsdenkmal und die Grünfläche ist für die Öffentlichkeit zugänglich. Im Park sind mehrere öffentliche Fußwege inklusive Sitzmöglichkeiten. Der Park bietet weiterhin einen Zugang zur Unterführung...
42017-02-04 06:43:18 UTCkarottenjunge1 Und ohne kritisierend zu wirken, in anderen Kartendiensten ist der Park bereits als Grünfläche markiert :) bitte also um Recherche/Korrektur
52017-02-04 06:55:00 UTCkarottenjunge1 Es handelt sich hierbei übrigens um den öffentlich zugänglichen Garten der St.Bonifatius (katholischen Kirche Metzingen) katholischekirchemetzingen.de Ein Teil des Gartens ist auf der Homepage der Kirche zu erkennen. Liebe Grüße
62017-02-04 11:22:27 UTCwoodpeck Hallo, kann es sein, dass hier ein Missverständnis vorliegt? Die Grünfläche, um die es hier geht - private Gärten im Dreieck Noyon-Allee/Emil-Mörsch-Weg/Herbstweg - ist (a) weder ein Park, (b) noch auf anderen Karten als Grünfläche markiert, (c) noch auf dem Gel&au...
72017-02-05 10:32:20 UTCkarottenjunge1 Tatsache. Nun sehe ich meinen Fehler auch. Der Edit galt dem Grundstück weiter südlich. Ich werde es direkt beheben! Vielen Dank für das Feedback!
12017-02-01 22:55:36 UTCwoodpeck Please explain why this was downgraded from service road to footpath?
22017-02-02 13:17:19 UTCSpanholz He still changes roads to footways, for example in the cemetery above.
12017-02-01 22:53:33 UTCwoodpeck Hello, why did you change 115th avenue into a footway? It looks like a normal residential road to me. Please explain.
12017-01-31 10:01:10 UTCwoodpeck Hello, could you explain the reason for deleting these roads, and your other deletions nearby? Your changeset comment is "Modifications", but this doesn't say why you thought these roads should be removed.

(automatic translation follows)

مرحبا، هل يمكن أن تفسر سب...
22017-01-31 13:09:10 UTCالبدري تحية طيبة
شكرا لاهتمامك
هذا الطرق التي تم حذفها لم يراعى عند رسمها قوانين المرور وايضا تم رسمها بصورة عشوائية وانا قمت بحذفها لكي اعيد رسمها بصورة صحيحة
تحياتي لك
32017-01-31 21:00:05 UTCPeda You are saying you deleted it to redraw it? But I don't see any new ways. I only see an empty region now. That's why I will revert your deletions. Please do not delete them again. You can improve them or you can add new ways. But if you want to delete existing work from your fellow mappers please di...
42017-01-31 22:54:39 UTCPeda_repair This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 45699753 where the changeset comment is: Revert changesets of user البدري due to unfounded deletions (please discuss before you delete existing data)
12017-01-20 00:26:38 UTCwoodpeck Du hast bei diesem Changeset als Quelle "Google" angegeben. Es ist uns leider nicht erlaubt, Daten aus Google in OpenStreetMap zu übernehmen. Kannst Du erklären, was Du mit "Google" als Quelle gemeint hast?
22017-01-20 08:13:03 UTCRaymond Gute Frage, ich habe keine Idee, wieso ich "Google" eingetragen habe. Nutze ich für OSM nie. Immer eigene Fotos und eigenes Wissen. Und eigenes Wissen auch in diesem Fall, da ich in der Gegend gewesen war.
12017-01-19 08:02:35 UTCwoodpeck Hello SHARCRASH, please consider using different changeset comments. "See the history of the elements from the according changeset." is without meaning, as checking the history of elements is exactly what one has to do if the changeset comment is missing! Nobody expects you to write a nove...
12017-01-05 22:22:20 UTCwoodpeck Hello Stephen214, in this changeset you seem to have deleted a large number of "mini roundabouts". Can you explain the reasoning behind this? Have you actually looked at the objects in question, or have you simply removed them according to some search/replace logic? Looking, for example, a...
22017-01-05 23:07:06 UTCStephen214 I looked at each one (of thousands, so hours of work) via sat imagery. Many cases, including the one you cited, were actually roundabouts, which have a non-mountable island, rather than mini_roundabouts, which have a mountable (often just paint) island. About as many cases were actually turning_ci...
32017-01-06 10:21:52 UTCPaul Johnson For example, the only mini-roundabout that I have found in the US so far is at http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1555921214
42017-01-10 19:36:04 UTCStephen214 These islands look mountable (just paint) as well:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/95712768
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/271831024
I have local knowledge these are mountable:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/767536813
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2958897476
In general, I assumed t...
52017-01-11 13:16:45 UTCPaul Johnson Those last two look iffy from the aerials but I'll take your word for it. The first two are definitely mini-roundabouts, good finds!
12017-01-02 12:42:19 UTCwoodpeck Hello richardsonp, in this changeset and a couple others you claim to have traced thousands of buildings from Bing imagery. Many of the buildings you have added have much more detail than can be seen on Bing though, e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/381251369 or https://www.openstreetmap.org/wa...
12016-12-28 14:05:13 UTCwoodpeck OpenStreetMap maps facts not fiction. Please provide evidence for the existence of this place, or if your edits were meant to be funny, please remove them from OpenStreetMap again. There are other projects like opengeofiction.net that are dedicated to drawing fictional maps; OSM is about reality!
12016-12-20 20:52:36 UTCwoodpeck Dear user LogicalViolinist. I have reverted an earlier import of yours because it was not sufficiently discussed. Now you claim to be "tracing missing buildings" from sources "Bing; Mapbox". I can say with 100% certainty that for example builidng https://www.openstreetmap.org/way...
22016-12-20 21:04:29 UTCLogicalViolinist This is most definitely not an import, I'm currently on mobile and will get back to you. This addition done by hand via mapbox, bing and local survey of the area. I have no desire to import data anymore as it will just get reverted if not passed through the proper channels. I'm currently tracing bui...
32016-12-20 21:16:27 UTCLogicalViolinist I've also been using ortho photos that are compatible with OSM tracing from the city of ottawa and carleton university(carleton you need to be a student to access the data, sorry)
http://data.ottawa.ca/dataset/aerial-photographs
http://carleton-u.maps.arcgis.com/apps/PublicInformation/index.html?...
42016-12-20 21:29:09 UTCLogicalViolinist I've learned from past events, its not worth importing. I've even reported imports to the DWG recently. I decide to do something manually and by the books and get threated with a revert. This is pardon my language bullshit.
52016-12-20 21:33:50 UTCwoodpeck Right, so you're saying you have accidentally left out the correct source tag for the imagery you've been using, and that nobody can double-check your statement unless they're students. May I respectfully ask you to be more careful in specifying exactly which imagery you are tracing from in the futu...
62016-12-20 21:39:36 UTCLogicalViolinist I'm sorry, the source field doesnt allow for long ass urls(character cap in JOSM) I will specify my proper sources in future changesets. The only reason you cant access the imagery from CarletonUniversity is because it's in their library that their GIS deparment conducted in 2014(20cm ortho) anyone ...
72016-12-20 21:47:33 UTCwoodpeck Well it doesn't say you need to specify an URL in the source tag. But the source tag is there for a reason. You specified a source tag that was obviously wrong, to anyone who cared to look; not even a local person with local knowledge would have known where to look had they wanted to verify what you...
82016-12-20 21:53:44 UTCLogicalViolinist Would saying CarletonU ortho(2014) and City of Ottawa ortho be sufficient?
92016-12-20 22:42:54 UTCLogicalViolinist I've looked on Bing and although it's offset(all imagery in Aylmer is, which only local knowledge would know) You can still see the details (though a bit pixelated) you can still trace from it with a good decerning(from bad imagery) eye
http://imgur.com/a/FO5dB
102016-12-20 23:54:59 UTCDevonF That's really awesome that aerial imagery is published under their opendata licence. Do you know if anyones converted it to a tile map on a public server? It'd be nice to add it JOSM

Also curious, would you mind posting a screenshot of the imagery you used to trace https://www.openstreetmap.org/w...
112016-12-21 00:19:07 UTCLogicalViolinist Unfortunately DevonF I cannot as although carleton University allows creating derivative works and tracing from their aerial imagery, they do not allow to copy/redistribute it(only for students/faculty at Carleton university), doing so may be punishable by revocation of access to the imagery.

So ...
122016-12-21 00:39:42 UTCLogicalViolinist Also DevonF, if a user cant add 1000ish buildings without being the spanish inquisition, osm will fall behind everyone. It's probably why digital globe and a relief effort have forked OSM and started contributing to their own fork and not OSM, because small time mappers waste their time.
132016-12-21 02:35:23 UTCLogicalViolinist Don't believe me? https://www.nga.mil/MediaRoom/PressReleases/Pages/2015-16.aspx
142016-12-21 04:33:24 UTCDevonF I agree nobody likes it when people are breathing down your neck and it's a waste of time checking every edit. However you have attracted some attention to yourself by some less-orthodox editing practices. But hopefully you'll be able to regain peoples trust. There are good reasons why I care about ...
152016-12-21 04:33:45 UTCDevonF After reading http://lifehacker.com/193343/ask-the-law-geek--is-publishing-screenshots-fair-use I'd say it's pretty damn safe to share a screenshot. But it looks like it's the same as what's hosted at http://maps.ottawa.ca. You can access JS slippy maps and WMTS api via http://maps.ottawa.ca/arcgis/...
162016-12-21 04:33:52 UTCDevonF That's really awesome about https://github.com/ngageoint/hootenanny. There are so many powerful tools which I dream about for making mapping much more fun and safe for everyone. I'm not sure where I see it mentioned about forking though. Many one-off contributors are just as important as massive imp...
172016-12-21 10:31:04 UTCLogicalViolinist I'm not using ottawa'ortho I know its from 2005. Im using the 2014 from carleton u that their gis department took(2014) http://carleton-u.maps.arcgis.com/apps/PublicInformation/index.html?appid=a9602c9a15fd4db898c7b8a264442038
As I am taking classes there, I have access to it.
182016-12-21 11:30:39 UTCLogicalViolinist Here's a ss of that building, now if you dont mind, i'll return to tracing.
http://imgur.com/a/pzdNL
192016-12-22 18:30:30 UTCDevonF The CU and Ottawa datasets are the same for 2014 judging by your screenshot. Here's a side-by-side of the house you added and the 2014 imagery http://imgur.com/a/pQZwP. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a house somewhere else with an incorrect footprint matching this house. I think this strongly re...
202016-12-22 18:33:03 UTCLogicalViolinist Devon quit wasting my time. maybe learn some HOT mapping or learn some building tracing, I'm not here to hold your hand.
212016-12-22 18:38:36 UTCLogicalViolinist This is from bing: http://imgur.com/a/9zU2K I may have missed some of the building, but i'm trying to trace quickly. I admit that the OttawaCarleton imagery is different, but I used a combination of Mapbox,Bing, OttawaOrtho and Carleton.
222016-12-22 18:56:59 UTCDenisCarriere Devon, your numerous comments in Canada are becoming very annoying to many of the "power" mappers. Just because you like to use iD & OSMAnd to map 1-2 features at the time. Some users are using JOSM to map multiple hundreds of buildings at a time.

You should spend your time doing mo...
232016-12-22 19:21:36 UTCwoodpeck Denis, you should be ashamed at trying to pull rank at someone whose comments you don't like. Stick to the facts.
242016-12-22 19:28:09 UTCwoodpeck LogicalViolinist, there is no way anyone would trace the building in http://imgur.com/a/9zU2K from the imagery in that picture. Neither Bing nor Mapbox nor whatever is in that picture has the detail to trace that outline. Not even a combination of all of them. -- And the only thing you have to say i...
252016-12-22 19:33:36 UTCLogicalViolinist Hi woodpeck, as you may know Denis and I know eachother in real life and are local mappers to the Gatineau/Ottawa valley. Is it surprising that I may have linked him my changeset via chat? No? Ok.

http://imgur.com/a/dRNnD
See how the white pixels follow the thing I traced? Well I followed the pi...
262016-12-22 19:39:45 UTCLogicalViolinist http://imgur.com/a/3BmD5
The top I followed the pixels again.
272016-12-22 19:43:36 UTCLogicalViolinist Not sure why so much scrutiny is going into one building when some people would just draw a rectangle over it and call it a day. Would they be brought in a microscope analysis of what they did and did not do? Nope. If you want me to fix the back of the house I'll gladly do it, but don't accuse me of...
282016-12-23 01:23:26 UTCscruss Sorry, but it doesn't look as if you can use the Carleton data to trace from: https://library.carleton.ca/sites/default/files/find/gis/DataUseAgreement.pdf
292016-12-23 10:57:03 UTCLogicalViolinist Thay seems to be talking about the imagery directly and not derivative work scruss
302016-12-23 13:46:13 UTCscruss Are your OSM contributions "for the exclusive purposes of teaching or academic research" at Carleton? If not, you can't use the data here, and you've signed something to say you won't when you started your course. Derivative works retain rights too: that's why we can't copy from Google Map...
312016-12-23 13:53:30 UTCLogicalViolinist I'll start working on reverting the changesets that used this imagery then.
322016-12-23 14:38:39 UTCLogicalViolinist Started the revert process
332016-12-23 16:05:57 UTCosmcanada_fix This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 44622688 where the changeset comment is: Reverted traced buildings due to imagery source
12016-12-19 16:57:14 UTCAlexey Lukin Hi Samely, your automatic deletions applied to Cambridge, MA, have been working on a bad data entered by an amateur user "margonotmango". Now the user is having trouble reverting her changes because of conflicts with your follow-up deletions. Can you please temporarily revert all your chan...
22016-12-19 19:18:40 UTCwoodpeck I'll try to fix this with DWG tools.
32016-12-19 19:21:13 UTCAlexey Lukin Thanks. Here are some extra details on the problem:

I'd like to report a massive mistake (or a vandalism) that has
happened 2 weeks ago to Cambridge, MA, USA. If you look at street
crossings here, it will become apparent:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/42.36534/-71.08999

In fact, the ...
42016-12-19 20:23:47 UTCsamely Hi Alexey, thanks for letting me know about this. There is no any automatic script to delete streets, while working on fixing overlapping I notice that there were many relations in separated lines so I mixed them in just one way.

Woodpeck, thanks for helping to fix this.
Let me know if you need...
52016-12-20 23:09:54 UTCwoodpeck_repair This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 44553573 where the changeset comment is: some fixes related to clean-up after accidental upload of 'lanelet' data to OSM. See http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44184590 for discussion.
62016-12-21 00:05:06 UTCwoodpeck I hope things look a bit better now. samely, I did initially revert many of your changesets so you will have received a bunch of messages, but I had to revert my revert again so most of your edits are still in place (but the problematic ones have been overridden by the margonotmango revert).
72017-01-06 14:55:37 UTCsamely Woodpeck, thanks for helping to repair this area and for considering my edits, I will take a look so I can contribute to improving this area.
12016-12-19 19:16:47 UTCwoodpeck Hello MDIV, it appears that 2 yrs ago you mapped some buildings twice here, e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/29627050 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/330248229 ...
12016-12-18 21:01:51 UTCwoodpeck Dear user Geozeisig, you have been told not to make mechanical edits like this in the past. Please adhere to these rules. It is not plausible that you have indeed looked at the objects you modified here individually because some of them contain other tagging inconsistencies that you have not fixed.
22016-12-19 09:06:10 UTCgeozeisig position=underground ist der falsche Tag. Karten die das auswerten sollen können damit nichts anfangen. Steht auch so in der Wiki
Gruß
12016-12-13 06:46:58 UTCwoodpeck Please write your changeset comment in the "comment" field (not "comments") so that it can properly be processed and displayed.
22016-12-13 08:45:57 UTCWetitpig0 How to reopen a changeset?
32016-12-13 09:43:18 UTCwoodpeck You can't reopen it. I meant just for the future, apparently you're not using one of the standard editors, so whatever software you use, make sure you use the "comment" field not "comments".

Regarding the boundary zone. You have mapped a very large area that is up to 10km wide...
12016-12-12 18:10:04 UTCwoodpeck There are two problems with this. First of all, you must not import data into OSM without following our import guidelines which mandate that you discuss the import before you act. Second, you must not import data that is "free except for commercial use", because the license that OSM itself...
22016-12-13 14:10:57 UTCfredi_alf I will revert back to previous.
Sorry.
32016-12-16 00:45:55 UTCfredi_alf This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 44436223.
42016-12-16 00:56:42 UTCfredi_alf This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 44436223.
12016-12-11 23:33:33 UTCwoodpeck Hello, could you please explain what the data source "ruian" is? Is this building import documented on the Wiki? Has it been discussed on the mailing list?
22016-12-12 05:55:41 UTCJandaM http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RUIAN

RUIAN data are manually traced in JOSM using Tracer plugin.
12016-12-08 19:54:00 UTCmikelmaron @woodpeck_repair was there any public discussion of reverting this import? I agree that imports should have discussion -- but also think reverts should have discussion too, and a chance for things to be made right.
22016-12-08 20:35:54 UTCwoodpeck We don't publicly discuss reverting imports but we usually seek to get in touch with the importers (in this case, three unsuccessful attempts have been made by various people in http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/37015792 http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/36896136 http://www.openstreetmap.o...
32016-12-09 15:34:18 UTCmikelmaron Thanks for the reply @woodpeck. I definitely agree we need documented imports, but I'm unclear about the proactive import process, and I'm far from the only one in the community confused by it. A few questions to help get a better picture.

* How are undocumented imports discovered? Are they repor...
42016-12-09 15:34:55 UTCmikelmaron s/proactive import process/proactive import revert process/
12016-12-05 10:11:24 UTChighflyer74 Hi there!

Is there any place where these imports have been discussed? I am just asking this, as your account is quite new and usually it is not the first action for a new OSM member to do large scale imports in several states. In addition to that some of the buildings have bad geometry (not recta...
22016-12-06 14:15:22 UTCosm_rucksackradar Hi, you are right. Another user gave me advice to announce large imports earlier. I will do that in the future on Slack https://osmus-slack.herokuapp.com/ and on talk-us.
I addressed the geometry problem manually, the problem is that many buildings have different shapes than rectangle, for exampl...
32016-12-06 14:34:16 UTChighflyer74 Hi Michael!

Thanks for your quick reply! Concerning the building shape: I was referring to buildings that are actually rectangular. I stumbled across some that were not corrected. I am not sure, as I am not a license specialist, but you might run into major problems if the license under which the...
42016-12-06 16:10:23 UTCNakaner Hi Oliver,

the Talk-us mailing list is not sufficient. See step 2.2 of the Import Guidelines available at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines#Step_2_-_Community_Buy-in. In addition, I want to point out that Slack is not even mentioned by the Import Guideline and no official comm...
52016-12-06 16:49:41 UTCwoodpeck I would also like to point out that the guidelines do not talk about *announcing* an import; they talk about discussing it and assuring the community is happy for the import to go ahead. A mere announcement is certainly not enough. I'm afraid these edits will have to be reverted.
62016-12-16 20:49:22 UTCwoodpeck_repair This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 44426389, 44387070, 44397974, 44390906, 44369720, 44363338, 44378632, 44444558, 44417849, 44406784, 44334110, 44452814, 44434181, 44359830, 44348987, 44437957, 44412921 where the changeset comment is: Revert un-discussed building footpr...
12016-11-28 01:29:54 UTCwoodpeck Many of the buildings added in this changeset intersect water areas (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/454731131) or streets (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/454731761). Since you claim that you traced these almost 3,000 buildings from aerial imagery, how come you did not spot these errors?
22016-12-13 17:56:27 UTCwoodpeck_repair 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_...
12016-11-28 01:24:43 UTCwoodpeck None of the sources in your source tag show a building in this location that you mapped in this changeset: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/455322726 - could you please specify the correct source?
22016-12-13 17:56:44 UTCwoodpeck_repair 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_...
12016-11-28 01:20:54 UTCwoodpeck This changeset appears to create about 24,000 buildings in one go. Are you sure that you have traced these from aerial imagery, as the source tag implies? The footprint of this building for example https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/455207307 is hardly decipherable from either Bing or USGS...
22016-11-28 02:08:52 UTCDavidKewley As a technical note less important than the question of the source(s): The building footprint that woodpeck cited was added in this changeset as two separate but identical ways, it appears.
32016-11-30 10:02:45 UTCbotdidier2020 hi,
there is some mistake with this your changeset :
duplicated tags and geometry
- inside changeset 43886022
- between this changesets : 43962925 vs 43960307 ; 43965236 vs 43960307 ; 43965236 vs 43962925
issues can be see at
http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/errors/?item=0&country=usa_...
42016-12-13 17:56:41 UTCwoodpeck_repair 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_...
12016-11-18 21:03:28 UTCwoodpeck You seem to be using an automated process to match Wikidata tags to exisitng OSM entries. This is a mechanical edit that requires prior discussion and agreement in the community. See https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618618
22016-11-18 21:28:46 UTCnyuriks @woodpeck, thanks for the heads up! I was using the JOSM's Wikipedia plugin - "Fetch Wikidata IDs" command to lookup IDs for rels and ways which had Wikipedia tag already. In the process I also uncovered a number of plugin bugs, some of which are now fixed. The process was not automated -...
32016-11-18 21:49:50 UTCwoodpeck Yeah, it is ok (even desirable) to add wikidata plugins to an individual object that you are looking at and that you have knowledge about, but it is not ok to simply mark everything and have the plugin slap on wikidata tags wholesale - that would then count as a mechanical edit.
42016-11-18 22:11:22 UTCnyuriks Understood, I will mostly work on high level objects (admin level <= 6) - those are easy to check, and provide the most interest to me.
52016-11-19 01:01:20 UTCnyuriks P.S. posted my thoughts at https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618646#p618646
62016-11-23 15:21:11 UTCwoodpeck I have read your forum entry, and what you are doing there (automatically adding Wikidata IDs with a JOSM plugin) is clearly a mechanical edit. You should not be doing that kind of editing across the globe without involving the local community and discussing your approach on a suitable mailing list,...
72016-11-23 17:17:14 UTCnyuriks Woodpeck, I have already stopped changing any objects except the admin levels regions 1-6, and even those I have greatly slowed down, and began reviewing most of the auto-resolved wikidata IDs. I will cease further automodifications, and instead concentrate on getting wikidata tags quality review fo...
12016-11-23 07:44:06 UTCwoodpeck This changeset seems to add over 40,000 trees at once. May I ask what the source of this data is?
12016-11-19 06:34:15 UTCwoodpeck_repair This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 43771527, 43735782, 43687220, 43712790, 43740825, 43741976, 43739178, 43713951, 43734444, 43733780, 43708551, 43713727, 43713559, 43713276, 43636853, 43709600, 43687159, 43710431, 43638915, 43701420, 43766338, 43700668, 43765438, 43735945, ...
22016-11-19 21:41:59 UTCDenisCarriere Well if it's such a legal issue, why don't you revert every wikidata tag in the world?? Why single out these changsets, many of these changsets were done manually.
32016-11-22 18:06:59 UTCTeiron what was an issue with this?
42016-11-22 21:32:52 UTCwoodpeck Teiron, major issue being that this was not sufficiently discussed before it was executed. You had a small number of pepole adding Wikidata entries all over the world, for places they had zero local knowledge about, aided by existing geo-information from Wikidata - which is fundamentally different t...
12016-11-18 23:41:03 UTCwoodpeck You have apparently made a series of fantasy edits in this changeset. Please do not use the main OpenStreetMap database for testing! Sign up for an account on master.apis.dev.openstreetmap.org if you want to test-drive the editor!
22016-11-18 23:42:31 UTCwoodpeck_repair This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43783802 where the changeset comment is:
12016-11-17 20:12:57 UTCaseerel4c26 Hi, please urgently stop your mass edits and explain what you are doing here and where it was discussed. Thank you.
22016-11-17 20:14:39 UTCLogicalViolinist Adding wikidata. You take a place name and look it up here: www.wikidata.org. The resulting ID gives you access to wikipedia pages, meta data etc
32016-11-17 20:15:29 UTCaseerel4c26 Thanks, okay. And how are you doing this? Are you aware of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct ?
42016-11-17 20:17:23 UTCLogicalViolinist I just told you.
1. Go to name field
2. Ctrl+c
3. www.wikidata.org
4. ctrl+v
5. Find city
6. Find ID
7. Ctrl+c
8. Go back and add wikidata
9. ctrl+v
52016-11-17 20:21:36 UTCLogicalViolinist It's the same idea behind:
https://www.mapbox.com/blog/geocoding-wikidata/
https://www.mapbox.com/blog/id-wikidata/

also the automated edits are not applicable in this case as I am reviewing all the changesets manually. Thank you
62016-11-17 20:21:45 UTCaseerel4c26 You are doing this that fast? Not automated? Quite strange.

So, you did not discuss this edit series somehwere?

Furthermore: could you please explain why you are reducing the percision of coordinates in some cases? E.g. http://osm.mapki.com/history/node.php?id=773647546
72016-11-17 20:24:19 UTCLogicalViolinist I downloaded the mapbox QA-tiles a couple days ago. Extracted the nodes with "place" tag. I then have been looking up places with same name. This is the result of my labour.
82016-11-17 20:25:48 UTCLogicalViolinist The 7th position of the decimal is a precision of less than 10cm.....I may have touched it by accident in JOSM
92016-11-17 20:30:51 UTCLogicalViolinist What I find quite strange is if I were to commit this one by one. No one would bat an eye, but I do it in a batch and questions are raised. It's the same thing as if I were doing it through ID or JOSM. The IDs are correct and I am not sure why they are being questioned?
102016-11-17 20:33:29 UTCaseerel4c26 Let me cite the code of conduct: "use of find-and-replace functionality using a standard editor such as JOSM or finding using services such as Overpass API and changing without reviewing cases individually;"

Precision: I doubt that. That would not explain several objects having a loss o...
112016-11-17 20:35:59 UTCLogicalViolinist But i'm not using an API, nor find and replace so what's your point?
122016-11-17 20:36:52 UTCLogicalViolinist also what algorithm please see the steps above.
132016-11-17 20:39:32 UTCLogicalViolinist Why does a offline edit have to be discussed? Do you have to email a mailing list when you edit a road, a building, a tree?
142016-11-17 20:39:50 UTCaseerel4c26 yes, if you would add them manually (e.g. while editing that place node anyway) no one would ask. The thing is: errors happen with automated edits. More eyes spot possible errors better than one person only. You may not have thought of all possible cases which are existing in the data. Automated e...
152016-11-17 20:46:06 UTCaseerel4c26 algorithm: okay, you mentioned "offline". So you did extract all nodes with a place tag from "mapbox QA-tiles" and then look up manually (pressing ctrl+C and so one) each name? Then you looked at the wikidata result and verified that it is the correct city (and not a equally name...
162016-11-17 20:46:17 UTCLogicalViolinist Do you understand English? These. Are. Not. Automated. Edits.
172016-11-17 20:51:20 UTCLogicalViolinist Qa tiles was to obtain node ids thats it. Everything else in josm
182016-11-17 20:53:11 UTCLogicalViolinist If you are scared of poor data, kindly point out a wikidata tag that is wrong
192016-11-17 21:42:11 UTCaseerel4c26 No, I will not look through the wikidata tags. Too hard to verify them one by one.

If those are not automated edits ... wow! I would automate that! :-)

I have asked for comments at https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=10
202016-11-17 21:42:39 UTCaseerel4c26 oops, this deeper URL: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=56436
212016-11-17 21:44:09 UTCLogicalViolinist Well I am aware that the German populous dislikes imports
222016-11-18 21:08:04 UTCwoodpeck I am appalled that after thoroughly botching an import in your home town, and having a proven history of quite a few under-the-radar imports, you (LogicalViolinist) are still at it, far from home, at full throttle. May I suggest you simply stick to the primitive kind of mapping that other people do,...
232016-11-19 06:32:34 UTCwoodpeck_repair This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43780386 where the changeset comment is: Revert mass addition of wikidata tags because of lack of prior discussion and unclear legal situation, see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618618
12016-11-13 00:22:36 UTCwoodpeck This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 43508161, 43401664, 43586101, 43400726, 42346992, 42518732, 42347148, 42512083, 42519026, 42198424, 42346785, 42520415, 43507099, 43401372, 43402690, 42519592, 43507348, 42518667, 42521676, 42521357, 42345941, 43586234, 43402332, 42521584, ...
22017-01-23 19:26:37 UTCSK53 Looks like the reverts didnt go back far enough Lambeth Bridge is a horrendous mess
12016-11-13 00:22:35 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:35 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:35 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:35 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:35 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:35 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:35 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:34 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:34 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:34 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:34 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-12 18:57:00 UTCAlecs01 Same as here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/43586101 in this changeset you even joined a bridge to a river https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4490051800, what's the rationale behind this?
22016-11-13 00:22:34 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:34 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:33 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:33 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:33 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:33 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
22016-11-13 06:24:23 UTCmavl Здравствуйте, Bonya_23.
В этом пакете правок вы добавили множество общих точек для линий, которые в действительно не пересекаются. Например:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/139137576 ...
12016-11-13 00:22:33 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:33 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:32 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:32 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:32 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:32 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:32 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:31 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:31 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:31 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:31 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:31 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:31 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:30 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-12 19:24:50 UTCAlecs01 This changeset created 635 nodes, most of them joining ways on different layers which shouldn't be connected
22016-11-13 00:22:30 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:30 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:30 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:30 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:30 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:29 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-12 18:35:54 UTCAlecs01 Hi, what are you trying to do here? you created hundreds of nodes joining roads and railways which do not intersect in real world, such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4497087495 (a railway and the bridge above) or https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4497087605 (an underground railway and anoth...
22016-11-13 00:22:29 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:29 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:29 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:28 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-13 00:22:28 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43591545 where the changeset comment is: Reverting those of bonya_23's changesets that created new intersections between more than 10 ways after a complaint to DWG that highlighted several such changesets that were creating intersections...
12016-11-12 22:06:04 UTCwoodpeck What you are mapping here seems to be a very temporary series of agricultural tracks, and why are you using 2000 nodes for every circle - that's way too much!
12016-11-11 21:16:13 UTCwoodpeck This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 43545192, 43545264.
12016-11-11 09:13:08 UTCfriedl Ich gehe davon aus, dass der Wald nicht komplett gerodet wurde --> habe den Wald wiederhergestellt.
22016-11-11 21:16:12 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43570082 where the changeset comment is: Datenloeschen revertiert. Bitte unterscheiden zwischen 'Weg existiert nicht' und 'Wegnutzung ist nicht erlaubt'. Auch Privatwege werden erfasst
12016-11-11 21:16:12 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43570082 where the changeset comment is: Datenloeschen revertiert. Bitte unterscheiden zwischen 'Weg existiert nicht' und 'Wegnutzung ist nicht erlaubt'. Auch Privatwege werden erfasst
12016-11-11 19:29:53 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43566929 where the changeset comment is: revert 'social graph' edits
12016-11-11 19:29:53 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43566929 where the changeset comment is: revert 'social graph' edits
12016-11-11 19:29:53 UTCwoodpeck This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 43561565, 43561455, 43561935, 43562209, 43561727, 43561667, 43561907, 43562097, 43562261, 43561504, 43560645, 43562146, 43561840, 43561781, 43561788, 43562704, 43561593, 43561628, 43561489.
12016-11-11 19:29:53 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43566929 where the changeset comment is: revert 'social graph' edits
12016-11-11 19:29:53 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43566929 where the changeset comment is: revert 'social graph' edits
12016-11-11 19:29:53 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43566929 where the changeset comment is: revert 'social graph' edits
12016-11-11 19:29:52 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43566929 where the changeset comment is: revert 'social graph' edits
12016-11-11 19:29:52 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43566929 where the changeset comment is: revert 'social graph' edits
12016-11-11 19:29:52 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43566929 where the changeset comment is: revert 'social graph' edits
12016-11-11 19:29:52 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43566929 where the changeset comment is: revert 'social graph' edits
12016-11-11 19:29:52 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43566929 where the changeset comment is: revert 'social graph' edits
12016-11-11 19:29:52 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43566929 where the changeset comment is: revert 'social graph' edits
12016-11-11 19:29:52 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43566929 where the changeset comment is: revert 'social graph' edits
12016-11-11 19:29:51 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43566929 where the changeset comment is: revert 'social graph' edits
12016-11-11 19:29:51 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43566929 where the changeset comment is: revert 'social graph' edits
12016-11-11 19:29:51 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43566929 where the changeset comment is: revert 'social graph' edits
12016-11-11 19:29:51 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43566929 where the changeset comment is: revert 'social graph' edits
12016-11-11 19:29:51 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43566929 where the changeset comment is: revert 'social graph' edits
12016-11-11 19:29:50 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43566929 where the changeset comment is: revert 'social graph' edits
12016-11-11 19:29:50 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43566929 where the changeset comment is: revert 'social graph' edits
12016-11-09 12:07:12 UTCSHARCRASH Woodpeck your edits are flawed! You are breaking the elements i created! They didn't need any edit! I'm astonished that someone who has such a position like yours within OSMF makes SUCH MISTAKES! This is not right, you made a circular track whereas it's an area of woods: https://www.openstreetmap.or...
22016-11-09 12:09:26 UTCSHARCRASH The element which i was talking about and must be grass instead of a service area is this one: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/452158351
32016-11-09 12:11:30 UTCSHARCRASH This place was filled with an area element: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/49.60999/5.90915
42016-11-09 12:21:04 UTCSHARCRASH https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/49.60357/5.90829
52016-11-09 12:41:16 UTCSomeoneElse @SHARCRASH You added https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/431452509/history as a circular highway=track 4 months ago. Are you saying that that is incorrect?
62016-11-09 12:51:19 UTCSHARCRASH No, i haven't plotted that as a circular track, that's user woodpeck altering and degrading data! I had plotted that element as a MP wood. Something is flawed in the recording process of the history, some edits within MPs are not being recorded.

Also user stereo is making degradations:
https://w...
72016-11-09 13:57:03 UTCwoodpeck Yes, it appears that the "reconstruct polygon" function has a bug when it comes to copying tags. I'll investigate and fix this before I continue, but I definitely intend to "degrade" many more multipolygons created by SHARCRASH - essentially all those where several otherwise unre...
82016-11-09 14:14:24 UTCSHARCRASH Unrelated??? Of course they are JUST woods! Would you care to explain me what makes them so special and so individual one from the other??? And if they are not for some very local reason, the MP can still easily be edited by someone who needs to make that specification. You, what you are doing here ...
92016-11-09 14:25:13 UTCSomeoneElse @SHARCRASH, heres an example where it makes sense to have two polygons linked together: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4807529 . Here the two pieces of natural=wood together form "Breck's Plantation" - they are logically one thing. However it doesn't make sense to join things int...
102016-11-09 14:39:38 UTCSHARCRASH I know that Andy. But why should i be forbidden to use MPs to ease my contributions within iD while i respect in general real features and what's been ruled out in Wiki! This editor doesn't have the complex plugin tools that JOSM has! Using only polygons would slow tremendously the workflow since i ...
12016-10-26 15:14:05 UTCNakaner Hi Aleks-Berlin,

why did you add the area of Russia in this changeset? This number can be retrieved by calculating and therefore does not have to be mapped at OSM.

I will remove this tag (and maybe all other occurences of sqkm=* you uploaded) in the next days.

In addition, I want to inform ...
22016-10-26 17:44:08 UTCAleks-Berlin Hi Michael,

please read my points.

1. how to calc area of oceans (node, no borders) ?
2. all segments have to be in same orientation (e.g. clock wise) before calculation, which is not assured.
3. Huge Relations (e.g. russia.osm = 37 MB), that is much to download for get one number.
4. OSM h...
32016-10-26 17:53:57 UTCNakaner HI Aleks-Berlin,

regarding item 1: If you want to calculate the land area, that's trivial. Even if you want to calculate the area on sea which belongs to Russian territory, it is simple.

regarding item 2: If you software is unable to calculate correctly if the orientation of the segments is wr...
42016-10-26 18:22:50 UTCwoodpeck If I may add 2 points: (a) Just because there is rubbish in OSM, that's not an excuse to add more! (b) Wikidata is more often than not derived from Wikipedia which is licensed CC-BY-SA; I know that Wikidata claims to be CC0 but I highly doubt the legality of this.
52016-10-26 19:00:40 UTCSimonPoole It should be noted that the WMF does not make any representations that the contents of wikidata are actually free of any third party rights, The CC0 licence of wikidata is simply based on a position statement by the WMF that facts can't be copyrighted..
62016-10-26 21:02:43 UTCAleks-Berlin again: how to calc the area of nodes (like place=ocean, that do not have any border) ?
Who should question the free usage of facts?
I understand that area can be calulated 'easy' for smaller objects. But why download megabytes to get one number?
With this argument we should stop overpass-turbo.eu...
72016-10-26 21:31:39 UTCSimonPoole You already have the comfort of looking up the value via the wikidata reference for not essential things (as for example the area).
82016-10-26 21:34:54 UTCNakaner … and therefore there is no need anymore to add this information to OpenStreetMap because the object which represents the territory of Russia (relation 60189) already has wikidata=Q159.
92016-10-27 17:43:58 UTCAleks-Berlin removed again for this relation, but todo (next days) for others
12016-10-25 21:10:01 UTCwoodpeck In this changeset titled "substation refinement", you have added denomination and religion information to many cemeteries. It would be good if you could - for this changeset and in the future - provide information about your sources. Did you run a web search? Consult Wikipedia? Do you live...
22016-10-26 10:47:41 UTC42429 Thanks for your interest in my sources!
1. Yes, the denomination of cemeteries is derived from wikipedia and web search. I should have added a link to Wikipedia articles, thanks for that suggestion!
(cemeteries were a minor by-edit)
2. Substation details are derived from reports (balance sheets, ...
12016-10-09 21:48:00 UTCwoodpeck Hallo Peer van Daalen, dieser Changeset-Kommentar war sehr unhöflich und ist geeignet, Deine ausgezeichneten Edits in Aachen und anderswo mit einem bitteren Beigeschmack zu verderben. Ich hoffe, Du bringst, wenn Du darüber geschlafen hast, die Größe auf, Dich zu entschuldigen.
22016-10-10 06:19:58 UTCPeer van Daalen Guten Morgen und vielen Dank, woodpeck, für Deine freundlichen Worte.
-
So wie es aus dem Wald rein schallt, schallt es auch wieder zurück ...
-
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/735717#map=19/50.77080/6.03663&layers=N
-
Hinzu kommt, daß es zwischen dem Mapper wambacher un...
32016-10-10 06:59:25 UTCPeer van Daalen ps: Nochmal zum Thema ´maxspeed´ in "Verkehrsberuhigten Zonen".
-
Gerade diesbezüglich habe ich mir die (oberlehrerhaften) Hinweise von MKnight mittlerweile zu Eigen gemacht und lasse seine Änderungen in dieser Sache an verschiedenen Orten in Aachen ja auch unkommen...
42016-10-10 18:42:56 UTCuvi Hallo Peer, du solltest dir im Klaren sein: Die hier von dir hinterlassenen Kommentare sind öffentlich und somit von jedermann zu lesen. Der von dir verwendete Wortschatz ist - unabhängig des dir möglicherweise entgegengebrachten Unverständnises - nicht zeitgemäß und b...
52016-10-11 21:02:30 UTCJojo4u In beiden Changeset hat Peer van Daalen zuerst diskriminierende, auf die Herkunft der anderen Mapper bezogene Worte gewählt. Dies hat meiner Ansicht nach keinen Platz in unserer Community.
12016-09-03 20:47:48 UTCwoodpeck This changeset looks very similar to a number of semi-automatic changesets by contributors working for Facebook that have been reverted because of low quality and a process violation (imports must be discussed before they are performed). Can you explain the process by which you extracted these ~ 850...
12016-08-08 22:24:59 UTCwoodpeck Deletions in this changeset have been reverted in #41334400. Please be more careful when deleting objects from OSM!
12016-08-08 07:53:54 UTCAmaroussi I've flagged this changeset for revert because it seems this changeset just indiscriminately deleted all data without a good reason, but there are conflicts that I need help with.
22016-08-08 22:24:43 UTCwoodpeck Deletions in this changeset have been reverted in #41334400. Please be more careful when deleting objects from OSM!
12016-08-08 07:33:55 UTCAmaroussi You just deleted some of the most important roads in Hyderabad with this changeset.

With a lack of a meaningful comment I cannot conclude whether this edit was a mistake or a malicious edit.
22016-08-08 22:24:23 UTCwoodpeck Deletions in this changeset have been reverted in #41334400. Please be more careful when deleting objects from OSM!
12016-08-08 00:15:52 UTCreneman Hallo, der User hat vor dem Import sehr viele Flächen gelöscht, Wälder, Wiesen und Felder. Werden die von User Squiffy vor dem Import gelöschten Daten bitte wieder hergestellt?
22016-08-08 21:10:30 UTCwoodpeck Kannst Du das konkretisieren - auf einen Zeitraum oder eine Liste von Changesets? Ich könnte zwar "alle Flächen, die in den X Wochen vor dem Import gelöscht wurden" wiederherstellen, fürchte aber, das wäre dann vielleicht zu viel und würde Duplikate verursache...
32016-08-09 21:18:57 UTCreneman Hallo, ich bin noch 2 Wochen im Urlaub in BG und bin hier nur sporadisch mit Internet versorgt, geschweige denn das ich mein Notebook dabei habe... Ich bin auf dieses Changset aufmerksam geworden, weil ich diverse Flächen in den letzten Jahren in BG erfasst hatte. Nun war mit dem langsamen Inte...
42016-08-09 21:23:57 UTCreneman Wenn ich mir seine Kommentare ansehe, werden vermutlich alle Changesets mit dem Kommentar "error corrections and cleanup of duplicates" mal ausgewertet werden müssen :(
12016-08-08 20:58:56 UTCwoodpeck Hello huanzai, what is a "lanelet" relation, what is "role=regulatory_element", and why do your ways have approximately one node every 5 meters?
12016-08-04 22:16:33 UTCwoodpeck What do you mean with "change road rev for Rand McNally maps" - you are not copying data from Rand McNally are you?
12016-07-27 21:48:05 UTCwoodpeck Why did you delete the country node for Palestine?
22016-07-29 19:25:36 UTCPeda Hello Eliot,
as you didn't reply yet and as more complaints came in, I did revert some of your changesets to restore the deleted boundaries (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/41116417).
Please refrain from fixing/touching the boundaries without prior discussion with the local community in th...
12016-07-27 21:47:03 UTCwoodpeck Why were village names deleted in this changeset?
12016-07-24 14:59:51 UTCwoodpeck This appears to be an undiscussed and faulty import of data that's more than 10 years old, with partially overlapping polygons. Can you explain?
22016-07-24 17:37:32 UTCReino Baptista Dear Woodpeck,

The data edited on this changeset (and comment as source:CLC) is from the well known "Corine Land Cover 2006" data set and was inputted accordingly with the osm recommendations on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Corine_Land_Cover.

In what concerns the data age plea...
32016-07-25 13:03:44 UTCwoodpeck RB, the wiki page you cite is not a carte-blanche for undiscussed CLC imports. You are expected to discuss your import on the imports mailing list nonetheless. Many people are of the opinion that CLC data is too old to be valuable. You appear to have deleted a large amount of data, partly forest pol...
42016-07-25 16:03:16 UTCReino Baptista Dear Woodpeck,
Thank you for your opinion.
As I previously stated I did not erase any data.
I added, joined and updated.
After you kind contact I did start revising the CLC data I added, coincidentally, around the coordinates depicted on "deletion.png".
RB
52016-07-25 23:35:15 UTCwoodpeck Dear RB, I am slightly concerned by your choice of words: "Thank you for your opinion". I might not have made myself clear enough. When I asked you to stop importing data, that was not an opinion, but a request of the OSMF Data Working Group that you would ignore at your own peril. I think...
62016-07-26 00:16:24 UTCReino Baptista Dear Woodpeck,

Please don't be alarm.
I used the word "opinion" just referring when you said: "Many people are of the opinion that CLC data is too old to be valuable" Finding this data was my motivation to do the work I did, since it dates from 12/2013. Now I know there are m...
12016-07-25 21:03:23 UTCwoodpeck Hallo "vorsignal", OpenStreetMap hat einen Benutzer in Dresden wegen massiven Fehlverhaltens dauerhaft gesperrt, Bitte trage daher keine "Korrekturen im Auftrag eines unbekannten Users" ein, denn es dürfte sich dabei mit an Sicherheit grenzender Wahrscheinlichkeit um genau d...
22016-07-26 10:17:33 UTCNakaner zurückgesetzt durch https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/41033907

PeterDRS/Kakaner soll keine Chance haben, seine Benutzersperren zu umgehen, auch nicht durch Anlegen anonymer Notes.
12016-07-18 22:38:02 UTCwoodpeck Please explain where the required discussion about this import was held before the import was performed.
12015-01-08 22:02:39 UTCTest360 Setting "landuse=wood" ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dwood_%28Don%27t_use%29 ) instead of "landuse=forest" seems a mistake according to the OSM wiki.
22015-01-08 22:38:24 UTCwoodpeck I agree. This does not, however, mean that you can simply chnage all landuse=wood to landuse=forst (or natural=wood) automatically. Your changesets have not been reverted because the content was wrong, but because the process was wrong.
32015-01-09 01:53:48 UTCTest360 I would like to know why the 27640972 changeset ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27640972 ) which is clearly not a mass edit as been reverted by this changeset.
42015-01-09 02:04:49 UTCTest360 Same request for the 27641137 changeset ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27641137 ), which was a local edit that fixed an obvious mistake.
52015-01-09 05:53:57 UTCTest360 Same request for the 27662643 changeset ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27662643 ) which can't be smaller because it change the way the river is tagged.
62015-01-09 05:55:19 UTCTest360 Same request for the 27662544 changeset ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27662544 ) which can't be smaller because it deals with a river.
72015-01-09 05:56:04 UTCTest360 Same request for the 27662224 changesert ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27662224 ) which can't be smaller because it change the way the river is tagged.
82015-01-09 05:57:46 UTCTest360 Same request for the 27661940 changesert ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27661940 ) which can't be smaller because it change the way the river is tagged.
92015-01-09 06:15:43 UTCTest360 I would like to know why the 27630561 changeset ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27661940 ) has been reverted. What is the problem? The changes in this changeset were not done automatically. And nobody complain in the discussion of the changeset.
102015-01-09 06:16:37 UTCTest360 I would like to know why the 27631195 changeset ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27631195 ) has been reverted. What is the problem? The changes in this changeset were not done automatically. And nobody complain in the discussion of the changeset.
112015-01-09 06:17:39 UTCTest360 Same request for the 27631546 changeset ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27631546 ).
122015-01-09 06:31:03 UTCTest360 Same request for the 27631744 changeset ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27631744 ). Again: not an automatic edit, no complaint.
132015-01-09 06:54:47 UTCTest360 Same request for the 27631975 changeset ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27631975 ). Not an automatic edit, no complaint.
142015-01-09 07:00:49 UTCTest360 Same request for the 27632063 changeset ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27632063 ). Not an automatic edit, no complaint.
152015-01-09 11:40:19 UTCRM87 http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27631744 - highway=services is ment to describe areas and makes no sense on ways. It would be ok to assume that this tag implies area=yes automatically. You should have made this change in the wiki not in the data. In case of wiki change a drop of note to taggi...
162015-01-09 11:51:16 UTCRM87 http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27631195 , http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27632063 , http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27632063 , http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27631975 and http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27632063 same as http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27...
172015-01-09 12:06:42 UTCRM87 http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27661940 , http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27662224 , http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27662544 and http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27662643

You should not make mega relations. These are hard to edit and even harder to fix as they tend t...
182015-01-09 12:25:34 UTCRM87 http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27641137 seems ok. You may redo it. This time with a little bit more descriptive comment. It is hard to notice that a space was removed from the word shared _lane . If a good changeset is in the middle of not so good changesets it might be not noticed.
192015-01-09 13:07:10 UTCRM87 http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27640972 5 of 6 changes were wrong (should have been surface=asphalt) and the sixth might have been wrong (felt like compacted on some parts). 5 are fixed with changeset http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/28018519
6.th one I did not touch.
Centerlines ...
202015-01-09 16:52:02 UTCTest360 About "highway=services": the OSM wiki clearly state: "Make sure you add the area=yes tag in case you tag a way, because it is not considered the default for closed ways."
212015-01-09 17:06:42 UTCTest360 The size of the relation is irrelevant. The changsets on river has been reverted because of « un-discussed mass edits », wich they are not. Where is the discussion about the size of the relation of these changesets before this revert?
222015-01-09 17:40:01 UTCTest360 About http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27641137 , you just state that it seems ok, but you don't explain why it has been reverted. I would like to know.

"good changeset is in the middle of not so good changesets it might be not noticed": are you implying that all these changesets ...
232015-01-09 17:57:58 UTCTest360 About http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27640972 , you discuss the correctness of the changeset, but you miss the point: why a non-mass edit changeset have been reverted in this changeset?

The correctness should have been discussed **before** the revert.
242015-01-09 18:01:47 UTCSomeoneElse @Test360 - although it's perhaps easy to get lost in a conversation entirely conducted in changeset discussion comments, perhaps it would help to read from the top again, including the comment that says "Your changesets have not been reverted because the content was wrong, but because the proce...
252015-01-09 18:17:21 UTCTest360 @SomeoneElse
Before my first comment, I didn't understand that this changeset reverts 80 of my changesets. I thougth that it was the revert of only one changeset. That's why I discuss the correctness. Then I understand.


"Your changesets have not been reverted because the content was wrong...
262015-01-09 18:23:33 UTCTest360 @RM87
"You should have made this change in the wiki not in the data": I don't understand at all this sentence. Can you explain in details? Thanks.
272015-01-09 18:38:07 UTCRM87 About "highway=services" do you really believe everything that is written or not written in the wiki?

I do agree that the changeset comment « un-discussed mass edits » does not fit for those river changeset reverts. Nevertheless there is a waterway relation model for the thi...
282015-01-09 18:59:52 UTCSomeoneElse @Test360, re the process: There's a mechanical edit policy described in the wiki here:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edit_Policy

The very first requirement is "Discuss". It's there for a number of reasons. OpenStreetMap is a shared database, but it's actually more...
292015-01-09 19:41:11 UTCRM87 About the wiki changing: the wiki page of highway=services should have say'd that this tag automatically implies area=yes on ways instead of insisting of adding area=yes to every single way. This can be done because the other option of closed way tagged an highway=services in the meaning of a non ar...
302015-01-09 19:46:35 UTCTest360 @SomeoneElse
Thank you for this detailed response, I get your point. I don't know if you had intended to answer my questions with this message, but they are left unanswered.

I have read the mechanical edit policy. Right now, I do *not* complain about the revert of my mechanical edits, I rather t...
312015-01-09 20:18:35 UTCTest360 @RM87
Thank you for this clarification. I now understand.

I see several reasons to not change the current lack of implication between highway=services and area=yes. So I won't try to change that by discussing it on the tagging list.

So do you agree that right now, a service area which is tagg...
322015-01-09 20:58:58 UTCTest360 I would like to know why the http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27643030 has been reverted: not a mechanical edit, just a group of two very local changes.
332015-01-09 21:10:48 UTCTest360 I would like to know why the http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27643284 has been reverted: not a mechanical edit, just a group of modifications that have been review one by one thanks to Bing.
342015-01-09 21:16:30 UTCTest360 I would like to know why the http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27643485 has been reverted: not a mechanical edit, just a group of modifications that have been review one by one thanks to Bing and based of the nearby streets in OSM.
352015-01-09 21:28:16 UTCwoodpeck You had made a large amount of mechanical edits interspersed by a few manual edits. The changeset comments were not suitable for determining whether something was a manual edit or a mechanical edit. I would normally have reverted *everything* done by you in that time span but instead I made an effor...
362015-01-09 22:46:44 UTCTest360 Why haven't you asked me what changeset are mechanical? If you had notified me of the revert of my 80 changesets before, I would gladly have provided you the ones that were mechanical.

"I would normally have reverted *everything* done by you in that time span". That is a very wrong way ...
372016-07-10 20:14:26 UTCgileri @woodpeck I'm interested (and I believe other mappers too) in seeing a resolution of this discussion and changesets.

Could you answer the points raised ?
382016-07-10 20:18:41 UTCwoodpeck Could you point me to the forum or mailing list where this changeset is being discussed? Only a few days ago I received inquiries from user "tuxayo" about this and I can hardly believe it is accidental that several people stumble across a year-old changeset?
392016-07-10 21:38:38 UTCgileri I'm not sure how it's relevant to the discussion of this changeset, but for full disclosure :

You're right, I stumbled upon this changeset by accident, and pointed @tuxayo to it, as we've had private discussions about this kind of changesets and their reversal by DWG.

I think we can now return...
402016-07-11 00:45:59 UTCwoodpeck See https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2016-July/076296.html
12016-07-03 22:26:30 UTCwoodpeck Please explain why you have made this revert. Also, what does source=survey mean in this context?
22016-08-03 22:15:52 UTCSomeoneElse Hello,
I'm writing to you on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group. Questions have been raised about the accuracy of the boundaries of Morocco, and I'm sending this message to many of the mappers who have edited in the area or expressed an interest, including you.

We're aware that there is dispute...
32016-08-30 21:04:14 UTCSomeoneElse Hello again,
Following on from my "I'm writing to you on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group" comment above, we'd had feedback from lots of OSM mappers in the area. The findings and the changes that will be made are described at
http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=606038#p6...
12016-06-27 22:21:21 UTCwoodpeck Dear user asdfqwer51, there is a suspicion that you are using unsuitable third-party sources to enter your data. For example this changeset created two schools, but these schools do not exist on the ground - construction has not even started. Apart from the fact that it is wrong to tag schools where...
22016-07-03 09:06:26 UTCwoodpeck I am now reverting these edits since I haven't had any reply from you.
32016-07-05 15:15:12 UTCwoodpeck_repair This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40501812 where the changeset comment is: Revert suspected copying from copyrighted data source after no reply received in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/39688528
12016-06-21 08:15:31 UTCwoodpeck In this and a couple nearby changesets you seem to be re-adding data that was removed by DWG because it was illegally copied from a copyrighted source. What is your source for adding this information?
22016-06-21 08:32:56 UTCmalcolmh My source was the tags that remained after redaction. Those tags belong to a long-since abandoned tagging proposal, so I converted them to the non-deprecated seamark tags using the values in the remaining tags, in addition to a couple of default values that my editing tool generates (buoy shape &...
12016-06-20 15:14:08 UTCwoodpeck Hi, are you sure the source of this is Bing? Frankly it looks like you might have been using a third-party source, for example how does Bing tell you to subdivide a building like this: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/381036028 ? Please comment.
12016-06-04 19:29:14 UTCwoodpeck Dear zohre2109, please don't draw rectangles tagged just "area=yes", they don't mean anything! Please also try and use a better changeset comment - as a rule of thumb, any changeset comment that fits all of your edits cannot be a good one! I told you so in this changset comment https://www...
12016-05-31 12:46:57 UTCwoodpeck I would appreciate it if you could use more precise changeset comments. I can see from the changeset that you edited a waterway but what exactly are you "fixing" (and, preferably, why - as you probably know, we do not usually start retagging everything just because the consensus on taggin...
22016-05-31 13:12:20 UTCRicoZ In this changeset I tried to fix JOSM warnings where the river crosses the lake shore and dam.

Btw I do try to contact the main contributors when I am doing larger scale retagging.
12016-05-25 18:50:34 UTCwoodpeck Dear zohre2109, thank you or your contributions to OSM. Please do not put house nunbers in the "name" tag, they belong in "addr:housenumber". You have also put house numbers in "addr:city", this is not correct either.

Please try to find a good description of your chn...
12016-05-24 21:00:21 UTCwoodpeck Please do NOT add house numbers into the name tag. Also, it would be helpful if you could group several changes into changesets instead of uploading every change individually, and then use a proper changeset comment instead of labelling every single one of your edits "ya ispravila zdaniye po ka...
12016-05-24 20:57:06 UTCwoodpeck In this changeset you added a bank tagged builidng=commercial. You should add an amenity=bank to get it rendered correctly. Also, name:tk is not required if it has the same content as name.
12016-05-24 20:54:56 UTCwoodpeck In this changeset, you changed the name of a hotel from "Jeyhun" to "Jeyhun Hotel 49
", and then you proceeded to add the tags "name:ru=Parfiya Hotel 51" and "name:tk=Parfiya Hotel 51". There are four issues with this: (1) name:ru is usually written in cyrill...
12016-05-23 15:34:10 UTCwoodpeck Hallo micha4, was ist das "Trassenpreisprogramm" und gibt es Grund zu der Annahme, dass seine Verwendung als OSM-Datenquelle zulässig ist? Leider gibt es gerade im DB-
Bereich immer wieder Missverständnisse, was Urheber- und Datenbankrecht anbetrifft...
22016-05-23 16:04:36 UTCmicha4 Hallo woodpeck,
ich habe das für jederman zugängliche trassenpreisprogramm der db zu suchen der abkürzungen genutzt, da dies für mich der einfachste weg war.
es gibt jedoch auch andere quellen wie z.B. http://www.bahnseite.de/DS100/DS100_main.html
die abkürzungen sind als...
32016-05-24 18:16:57 UTCwoodpeck Hallo micha4, bitte verwende in Zukunft nur noch Datenquellen, von denen Dir eine explizite Genehnmigung vorliegt, oder die deutlich als offen lizenziert gekennzeichnet sind. Dass ein Programm oder eine Webseite für jedermann zugänglich ist, heißt nicht, dass wir daraus abschreiben d...
12016-05-11 16:49:51 UTCPolarbear Hallo why_not_zoidberg,
aus welchem Grund hast du in diesem CS und in 39096370 über 1200 korrekte Adressknoten gelöscht, nur um die Daten auf die Umringe zu legen? Beide Methoden sind anerkannte Mappingstile, daher lag kein Fehler vor, durch die Änderung fehlt aber die Historie der K...
22016-05-11 22:20:23 UTCwoodpeck Interessiert mich auch. Bitte ausserdem vernünftige Changeset-Kommentare benutzen (z.B. "Adressknoten gelöscht, Adresse an Gebäude angefügt weil <X>"), um künftig Nachfragen vorzubeugen.
32016-05-13 07:53:06 UTCgeow Bei EFH, DHH und RH ist jedem Gebäude(teil) in der Regel eine eindeutige Hausnummer zugeordnet, Hausnummer und Gebäudeteil bilden gewissermaßen eine Einheit. Merkmale sollen lt. Wiki nicht in zusätzlichen Nodes erfasst werden, wenn ein Objekt z.B. bereits als Polygon vorliegt. D...
42016-05-13 09:04:28 UTCwoodpeck @geow, ich sehe das so wie die leidige "Flächen verkleben"-Diskussion - wenn einer eine Gegend mappt, soll der dabei entscheiden, wie ers macht, und wir brauchen niemanden, der hinter ihm herputzt, ohne Information hinzuzufügen.
52016-05-13 10:00:58 UTCgeow @woodpeck, hm, dass nur _einer_ eine Gegend mappt, kommt ja praktisch nicht vor, zum Glück :) Da das Wiki hier auch keine Empfehlung anbietet, sind ständige Diskussionen die Folge.

Mein Vorschlag wäre: Gebäude hat nur eine Adresse => Adresse ans Gebäude.

Gebäu...
62016-05-13 10:30:48 UTCPolarbear Die Grundsatzdiskussion können wir gerne auf talk-de weiterführen (ich bevorzuge beim EFH auch den Umring), hier ging es um das mechanische Ändern mit den typischen Kollateralschäden.

Kürzlich hatte ich hier übrigens grade den umgekehrten Fall: https://www.openstree...
72016-05-13 23:18:48 UTCBeKri Hallo zusammen;
why_not_zoidberg ist ein alter Bekannter aus München und Umgebung ...
Er hat schon 2014 grossflächig in München Nodes in Umrisse verwandelt, ich und rolandg haben gebeten das zu unterlassen, er hat sich "KOMMENTARLOS" daran gehalten.
Dieses Frühjahr w...
82016-05-14 03:52:16 UTCwhy_not_zoidberg Ach BeKri lass doch das trollen...
Du hast damals doch selbst öfter Adressen von Gebäuden gelöscht und auf Knoten verschoben.
Außerdem hast du mich um gar nichts gebeten, sondern nur kommentarlos rückgängig gemacht und rolangd hatte ich damals geantwortet.

Ich bin...
92016-05-14 08:23:28 UTCzarl Wie wäre es aber mal mit der Angabe deiner Quellen für deine Edits? Ich finde in deinen changesets kein source=*
Das könnte survey sein und/oder Bing.

Siehe auch https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/39239962
12016-05-11 21:43:51 UTCDD1GJ Der Flugplatz ist incl. der Grasbahnen korrekt in den Rohdaten getaggt. OpenStreetMap ist eine Geodatenbank. Wenn eine Karte das "überdimensioniert" darstellt, dann ist dies kein Grund, alles zu löschen.
22016-05-12 07:20:29 UTChlgsms Ok, ich sehe ein, dass das richtig mit surface "grass" agnelegt ist. War definitiv nicht richtig von mir, das zu löschen. Bitte um Entschuldigung.

Auf den OSM-Karten wirkt es für den Laien so als könnte da eine 747 landen. Vielleicht kannst Du mir einen Hinweis geben, wo ...
32016-05-12 08:04:42 UTCwoodpeck Die richtige Adresse für Verbesserungsvorschläge am Standard-OSM-Kartenstil ist https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues - wenn Du aber selbst keinen GitHub-Account hast bzw. anlegen willst, kann ich das auch für Dich dort melden. Ob/wie/wann es geändert wird, d...
12016-05-12 06:25:21 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has introduced a number of broken (self-intersecting) polygons with severely jagged edges - it doesn't look hand-drawn. How did you create these forest areas, was some auto-tracing plugin involved?
22016-05-12 06:55:31 UTCkariboo Hello, it's made using area selector plugin in josm.
32016-05-12 07:01:05 UTCkariboo Hallo,
do you know how join 2 intersected areas properly with 1 common line?
mfg
12016-05-11 17:11:05 UTCwoodpeck Dear Aboudrar Said, if you edit a large number of place nodes, please explain in the changeset comment what exactly you changed and don't just write "fixing" - in this case it seems you added a "capital" tag with a numeric value to places in Morocco but you would have saved me 10...
22016-05-11 18:19:39 UTCAboudrar Said ok, i will take your remark into consideration.
12016-05-09 17:21:32 UTCwoodpeck This looks like an un-discussed an un-documented data import to me. Imports not following the [import guidelines](http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines), which among other things require thorough discussion and community review before going ahead, are liable to be reverted.
22016-05-09 21:26:51 UTCDilys Which part of the changeset are you concerned about? The boundary line I corrected? The inholdings I added?
12016-05-04 14:48:37 UTCwoodpeck This appears to be a data import but I cannot see any discussion on the imports list or a mention in the Wiki. Are you aware of our imports policy? Please suspend any further importing activity until this is cleared up.
22016-05-04 14:58:01 UTCSomeoneElse There definitely seem to be some problems here. Have a look at http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?editor=potlatch2&node=4164881809#map=19/-42.92845/147.99563 (that'll show duplicate nodes clearer than JOSM will) - number of duplicate nodes show up quite clearly. Please don't try to fix it yet t...
32016-05-05 06:19:41 UTCMulti Pass Hi, I was a bit too eager and did a bulk upload of the LGA boundaries for Tasmania, with the false assumption I could easily "live edit" afterwards. I've since made significant corrections in JOSM but can't fix my prior changesets because I have not kept track of the object IDs and many of...
42016-05-06 07:00:55 UTCMulti Pass Well I tried using JOSM reverter but now have IO Exception error messages after the first successful revert. I think I will leave things alone before I start a fire somewhere...
52016-05-09 02:41:42 UTCMulti Pass FYI I have been able to clean up the mess by manually deleting the data. I'll be more careful from now.
12016-05-04 12:34:03 UTCwoodpeck Was soll denn hieran "korrigiert" sein? Erstens heißt es auf Deutsch nicht "Brandt Straße" und "Soldaten Weg", sondern "Brandtstraße" und "Soldatenweg", und zweitens handelt es sich hierbei nicht um die tatsächlichen Namen dies...
22016-05-04 12:36:33 UTCwoodpeck_repair This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 39095521 where the changeset comment is: Vandalismus von MonsterStreamer revertiert, siehe http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=591228
12016-04-14 22:15:40 UTCwoodpeck It is still not entirely clear to me what happened here. A larger number of roads seem to have been accidentally deleted by various users, among them Maissara youssouf, ali said, and zainaba med, in the course of tracing buildings. I commented on some of the problematic changesets. Since there have ...
22016-04-22 14:06:47 UTCGrillo I tried to do some cleanup (mainly JOSM validator corrections) but there's so much data that doesn't make sense so it's hard to know which is correct and which is bogus and should be deleted.

Most area=yes are probably building=yes but almost all of them need to be adjusted...
12016-04-14 22:11:33 UTCwoodpeck You have deleted a couple of important roads in this changeset, which I reverted in http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/38570274 - please be careful with the delete button!
12016-04-14 22:10:48 UTCwoodpeck You have deleted a couple of important roads in this changeset, which I reverted in http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/38570274 - please be careful with the delete button!
12016-04-14 22:09:51 UTCwoodpeck Subsequent edits by other users have broken some of the roads on the Comores and I have tried to repair that in http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/38570274. It appears that you joined several roads in this changeset, and I fear I have reset things to a situation before your join. Could you check...
12016-04-14 22:07:10 UTCwoodpeck You have deleted a couple of important roads in this changeset, which I reverted in http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/38570274 - please be careful with the delete button!
12016-04-04 23:31:27 UTCwoodpeck Bitte vor künftigen Namensänderungen von Städten oder Gemeinden einen Konsens entweder auf der talk-de-Liste oder im deutschen OSM-Forum suchen.
22016-04-10 10:16:06 UTCJ budissin Es gibt einen Konsens im deutschen OSM-Forum.
32016-04-10 17:06:19 UTCwoodpeck Dass Du meinen Kommentar ignoriert und den Namen in Changeset 38447189 wieder geändert hast, ist dreist. In http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=31599 kann ich keinen Konsens erkennen, im Gegenteil, es gibt (neben Verständnis für Deine Sache) auch viele Gegenargumente. Die ...
42016-04-10 17:18:40 UTCwoodpeck http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=587758#p587758 neuer Thread hier
52016-07-14 13:41:42 UTCdieterdreist Es gilt im Zweifel die vor-Ort-Regel: das, was gebräuchlich ist, kommt in den name-tag. Die gesetzliche Lage sollte man nicht komplett ignorieren, es hat schon seinen Grund, warum dort neben deutsch auch sorbisch Amtssprache ist und die Beschilderung auch in sorbisch erfolgt.
62016-07-14 16:01:38 UTCJ budissin Danke. Sh. dazu auch den Diskussionsstand Mitte Mai im oben verlinkten Thread und die daraufhin gefundene Formel hier: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multilingual_names#Germany
72016-07-14 16:33:41 UTCdieterdreist danke für den Link, das war mir in dem Thread entgangen, dass die Lösung gefunden wurde (ist gleich wie auch in anderen multilingualen Gegenden, z.B. Belgien, Südtirol)
12016-04-02 14:12:44 UTCwoodpeck This changeset didn't "change" addr:country, it *added* addr:country to a number of ways and nodes. What data (or logic) did you use to derive the country a building was in, and why did you do it exactly for these objects and not others? Large-scale mechanical edits are generally frowned u...
12016-04-02 14:07:20 UTCwoodpeck Du hast in diesem Changeset einer Reihe von Straßenstücken ein "oneway=no" verpasst. Warum? Leider kann ich dem etwas nichtssagenden Changeset-Kommentar "Änderungen" nicht entnehmen, was die Motivation dahinter war. Es wäre super gewesen, wenn Du geschrieben ...
12016-03-30 20:19:25 UTCwoodpeck Why have you deleted the landuse=grass tag from this way and left a tag-less way in OSM?
12016-03-30 20:18:51 UTCwoodpeck Why have you re-uploaded an identical copy of this way with no changes?
12016-03-30 20:18:12 UTCwoodpeck Why have you deleted the leisure=park tag from this way?
22016-04-04 22:35:17 UTCPolarbear Noticed that problem as well, see here https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35376684 or http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/34250891

That seems to come from a specific website, that asks users to check OSM data against aerial imagery, and to either confirm or remove green feature tags: http...
32016-04-04 22:49:10 UTCPolarbear See also http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=562219#p562219
12016-03-30 20:00:30 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 38179604 where the changeset comment is:
22016-03-30 20:05:40 UTCwoodpeck Hallo klein-schloti, ich musste Dein Changeset leider revertieren. Privatwege dürfen nicht einfach aus OSM gelöscht werden - das hat auch wenig Sinn, jemand anders wird sie kurz drauf wieder eintragen. Stattdessen markiere sie mit "access=private", dann erscheinen sie auf der Kar...
32016-03-30 20:35:42 UTCklein-schloti Das ist ja interessant, dass hier jeder Gartenweg kartiert wird.
Wenn auf dieser Plattform privates nicht respektiert wird, fühle ich mich gezwungen, andere Wege zu gehen.
Frage mich sowieso wie der "Weg" in ihr System gekommen ist.
Dieser Bereich ist privat und nicht öffentli...
12016-03-30 19:59:09 UTCwoodpeck Hallo, Dir ist ein kleiner Fehler bei Deinen Beiträgen zu OSM unterlaufen: Du hast 14 Punkte eingezeichnet, ohne aber anzugeben, worum es sich handelt. Die Punkte sind nun zwar drin in OSM, aber keiner weiss, was sie darstellen sollen! Du musst im ID-Editor im Drop-Down irgendwas auswählen...
12016-03-28 22:51:57 UTCwoodpeck Hallo wischmat, bitte unterlasse unbedingt die großflächigen Löschungen von Deiner Ansicht nach unnötigen Tags. An vielen Stellen stehst Du nun als letzter Bearbeiter einer Relation da, die durchaus auch andere Probleme und andere unnötige Tags haben könnte, aber das i...
22016-03-30 21:11:52 UTCwoodpeck_repair This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 38179313 where the changeset comment is: reverted mechanical edits made by newly-created user wischmat after complaints in German forum, and after wischmat neglected to explain himself there. See http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic....
12016-03-28 22:46:20 UTCwoodpeck Hm, ein "shop" ist es eigentlich nur, wenn da auch Laufkundschaft hinkommen kann - hier sieht es mehr so aus, als ob jemand aus dem Wohnzimmer Wein verkauft? Ausserdem ist möglicherweise die Hausnummer falsch - am Haus steht die 47, am Node die 147?
12016-03-28 22:33:26 UTCwoodpeck Hallo 19Schmiddi90, willkommen bei OSM und Danke für Deine Beiträge! Mir ist aufgefallen, dass Du Deine Änderungen alle nur mit "Details verbessert" kommentierst. Das ist sicherlich zutreffend, aber es trifft auf die allermeisten Edits in OSM zu - es wäre schon super, w...
12016-03-27 22:27:36 UTCWynndale Keep up the good work. This sort of edit is absolutely the sort of knowledge base that we are trying to build.
22016-03-28 10:44:25 UTCmavl Hello, dear contributors.
Do you think that Russian traffic sign has Japanese name? [http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2958972984/history]
32016-03-28 15:59:07 UTCDeanna Earley FYI, we don't put transliterated names into osm.
Names in other languages should only ever be entered if that object is truly known by that name, in that language.
Please see this page for more details: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Avoid_transliteration
Deanna, DWG.
42016-03-28 21:16:42 UTCWynndale The idea of special restrictions on any sort of multiple-language names was comprehensively rubbished on the mailing list last year. http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Can-wikidata-links-help-fight-name-inflation-td5846168.html Unfortunately the wiki hasn’t caught up until now.
52016-03-28 22:20:06 UTCDeanna Earley As had been said by other members of the DWG, osm is not the place to store transliterations.
A name should only ever be added to osm, if that place actually has that name.
If you want a local transliteration, then the data user can do that itself.
Do not make up translated data just because i...
62016-03-28 22:22:42 UTCSomeoneElse @Wynndale It wasn't "comprehensively rubbished" - for example, there's been no good answer to "How do we tell real names in use in a place from translations" and "It's not a
reasonable request to ask OSM to store up to 7,000 variants against
45,000,000 names, when most o...
72016-03-28 22:23:23 UTCwoodpeck ... and on the rare occasions where you haven't actually observed a sign that carried the name you're adding, please specify your source so that it may be verified.
82016-03-31 13:24:35 UTCetajin Japanese names are mainly from Wikipedia:ja, For example, name:ja "ヴォログダ" for the name "Вологда" is based on https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%B4%E3%82%A9%E3%83%AD%E3%82%B0%E3%83%80
If a POI has the name "Вологда", Japanese will call it "...
92016-03-31 13:48:49 UTCDeanna Earley etajin: But it's never going to be labelled (on the ground) as "ヴォログダ", therefore it shouldn't really be tagged as such. The place node/relation maybe, but nothing else.
12016-03-27 14:33:19 UTCJo Cassel Ein Bot, dumm wie Bohnstroh
22016-03-27 16:16:16 UTCNakaner Jo Cassel, kannst du das bitte genauer begründen? Eine frühere Version des Bots (ist schon ein paar Jahre her) hatte die Erlaubnis, in OSM zu editieren.
32016-03-27 19:53:42 UTCJo Cassel Hallo Nakanar!
Hat der Bot auch damals schon versucht Hausnummern zu generieren, davon lese ich nämlich nichts in der Bot-Bearbeitungs-Beschreibung.
Ich geb ja zu, dass mir bewusst war, dass mein addr-Tagging von Straßenbäumen problematisch war, aber sinnvolle Alternativen konnte m...
42016-03-27 20:19:24 UTCNakaner Danke für deine Beschreibung. Damit deine Argumentation nachvollziehbar wird, wäre es nett, wenn du auf die Objekte https://www.openstreetmap.org/(node|way|relation)/ID/history verlinken würdest.

Wenn der Bot solche Sachen macht, wäre ein Revert überlegenswert. (auß...
52016-03-27 20:31:12 UTCwoodpeck Bitte ein Beispiel zeigen, an dem der Bot Unsinn gemacht hat, OHNE dass vorher bereits Unsinn herrschte.
62016-03-27 20:38:55 UTCwoodpeck An xybot, bitte darauf achten, dass der Bot nur die Dinge macht, die auch im Wiki dokumentiert sind, und wenn Du das ausweiten willst, bitte vorher dokumentieren. Im Wiki sehe ich nichts von automatischer Hausnummer-Erkennung.
12016-03-26 00:09:41 UTCwoodpeck Hallo buffelei, willkommen und danke für Deine Beiträge! Mir ist aufgefallen, dass Du als Änderungskommentar immer "Update" oder "Ergänzungen" angibst. Das ist natürlich nicht ganz im Sinne des Erfinders - schliesslich ist fast jeder Beitrag zu OSM ein Up...
22016-03-26 09:21:20 UTCbuffelei Hallo woodpeck, danke für Deinen Tipp. Mir war der Sinn und Zweck des Kommentars nicht ganz klar, deshalb habe ich als Standartkommentar "Update" genommen. Werde das in Zukunft dann etwas konkretisieren, so dass man das dann besser nachvollziehen kann :)
12016-03-25 09:52:59 UTCwoodpeck Hallo He1mi, willommen und danke für Deine Beiträge! Mir ist aufgefallen, dass Du an einigen Stellen "oneway=no" eingetragen hast. Normalerweise lassen wir Angaben zur Einbahn-Eigenschaft weg, wenn es sich nicht um eine Einbahnstraße handelt (sonst müssten wir 99% alle...
22016-03-25 10:04:03 UTCHe1mi Hallo woodpeck!
Danke für Deine Hilfestellungen. Einbahnstraßen lasse ich dann mal weg.
Ich habe ein paar Straßen von "track" auf "unclassified" hochgestuft. M.E. handelt es sich bei diesen mehr um kleinste Verbindungsstraßen als um Feldwege. Ich bin hier...
32016-03-25 10:17:20 UTCwoodpeck Nee, war mein Versehen, ich habe "service" geschrieben, meinte aber "unclassified". In beiden Fällen kannst Du tracktype weglassen, weil man sowohl bei service als auch bei unclassified eine asphaltierte Oberfläche annimmt (wenn nix anderes dasteht). Von meinem Mapper-B...
12016-03-25 10:12:30 UTCwoodpeck Willkommen und danke für Deine Beiträge! An zwei Stellen hast Du einen Straßennamen entfernt und stattdessen eine Nummer hingeschrieben ("ERH 24", "FO 12"). Das machen wir nicht - die Nummer gehört in das "ref"-Tag, nicht in den Namen. Wenn die Stra...
12016-03-25 10:04:24 UTCwoodpeck Hallo joeschbali, willkommen und Danke für Deine Beiträge! Mir ist aufgefallen, dass Du den "Änderungskommentar" im Editor beim Speichern immer leer lässt. Das erschwert es anderen, Deine Änderungen anzuschauen. Gerade, wenn Du neu bist, ist es eine gute Angewohnhe...
22016-04-05 12:08:13 UTCjoeschbali Danke für den Hinweis, das werde ich beim nächsten mal gerne beachten.
12016-03-25 10:02:16 UTCwoodpeck Hallo Theo88, willkommen und Danke für Deine Beiträge! Mir ist aufgefallen, dass Du den "Änderungskommentar" im Editor beim Speichern immer leer lässt. Das erschwert es anderen, Deine Änderungen anzuschauen. Gerade, wenn Du neu bist, ist es eine gute Angewohnheit, ...
12016-03-23 19:53:44 UTCwoodpeck Lieber Uwarius! Danke für Deine Beiträge. Allerdings ist es nur beschränkt nützlich, wenn Du wie hier einen Punkt mit einem Namen setzt - Du musst im Editor schon auch auswählen, dass es eine Bushaltestelle ist, erst dann erscheint das richtige Symbol auf der Karte!
22016-03-24 16:19:44 UTCUwarius im editor habe ich aber nicht symbol Haltestelle gefunden,kannst du den link mailen - Habe sogar versucht die falsche Position einer anderen Haltstelle Namens Dorfaue in der Zossener Str auf die richtige fast in der Mitte der Dorfaue zu verschieben . Löschen konnte ich das symbol auch nicht, ...
32016-03-24 16:32:40 UTCwoodpeck Ich habe mich eingeloggt im Editor und auf die Haltestelle geklickt. Dann stand oben links "Punkt" im Drop-Down. Da hab ich draufgeklickt und "Haltes" geschrieben, dann hat sich unten schon eine Liste mit Möglichkeiten aufgebaut, eine davon war "Bushaltestelle", da...
12016-03-22 23:44:26 UTCwoodpeck This looks like an undiscussed import. I can't find anything about this on the Wiki; many objects have strange, unusual tags ("gm_type"), and it is unclear if "Hargeisa District map" is a legal source! There are a couple other similar changesets nearby. I fear that it will be nec...
12016-03-22 19:46:50 UTCwoodpeck Hallo DrahtlosDSL, was ist mit diesem Punkt gemeint, der den Namen "WDSL" trägt und sonst keine Eigenschaften hat?
12016-03-22 19:42:34 UTCwoodpeck Auf dem Bing-Luftbild ist ein großer Teil des hier von Dir gelöschten Weges deutlich zu erkennen. Ist hier inzwischen (seitdem das Bild entstanden ist) eine bauliche Veränderung eingetreten? -- Falls der Weg existiert, aber nicht nutzbar ist, dann solltest Du dafür ein access=pr...
12016-03-21 22:00:13 UTCwoodpeck Hallo Christian, willkommen bei OSM und danke für Deine Beiträge! An einer Kleinigkeit muss ich allerdings herummäkeln: Segelflugplatzrunden sind in OpenStreetMap nicht erwünscht.Auf http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Aviation findest Du mehr Informationen zum Thema.
12016-03-19 20:41:00 UTCwambacher boundary=landarea is "dead". there is no reason for that. and it is not used any more.

for island in the see, the coastline is the admin-boundary for all admin_levels > 4

please revert your changes otherwise i have to talk to the dwg.

walter
22016-03-19 20:42:26 UTCwambacher and please: you should discuss changes on admin boundaries before you change them.
32016-03-19 22:31:10 UTCVerdy_p No: the islands that were present are in false "motus" and not really the islands.
They are not even the adminsitrative boundaries (that were not tagged at all before, because the only thing that was present was the international boundary of France and there was nothing about communes, co...
42016-03-19 22:35:13 UTCVerdy_p Note: boundaries for landareas are not dead, especially not in France.
There are still lot of work to do in French Polynesia, but nothing was removed.
In a later update I'll take into account the "baselines" for communes, but for now the islands are the not the administrative "bound...
52016-03-19 22:38:20 UTCVerdy_p Also, your threat of dwg is unfair. the current boundaries of "islands" are very approximative (these are only "motus") and none of them are the "baseline" which is the adminstrative boundary for *local collectivities* (but not for the prefectoral administration of Fran...
62016-03-20 17:06:08 UTCwoodpeck Why were over 4000 ways and 49000 nodes touched in an edit that supposedly only fixes a few boundaries? Was this a mistake?
72016-03-21 08:11:00 UTCVerdy_p it started locally (in the Kerguelen islands where most of the nodes and ways are located), then there were many affected dependant relations, I checked many of them and found some of them were broken locally and I fixed them, there was also several edit conflicts on them and to solve them I had to ...
82016-03-21 08:11:28 UTCVerdy_p Note: this is discussed on the French OSM talk list.
12016-03-20 17:01:39 UTCwoodpeck Hallo ironbiff, willkommen bei OpenStreetMap und danke für Deine Beiträge. -- Bedenke allerdings bei künftigen Edits, dass die Darstellung, die Du auf www.openstreetmap.org siehst, nur eine von vielen möglichen Darstellungen ist; nur weil hier zufällig - aufgrund der Wahl vo...
12016-03-20 08:26:12 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 37951282 where the changeset comment is:
22016-03-20 08:38:09 UTCwoodpeck Hallo, Du hast in diesem Änderungssatz, den Du "Test" betitelt hast, ein Waldstück in Dresden gelöscht. Das habe ich wiederhergestellt.
12016-03-18 06:50:30 UTCwoodpeck Dear dbusse, could you explain what your workflow was in this changeset? It appears that you have touched a large number of totally fictional roads added by use elijose, for example https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/370735050 - you cannot possibly have verified that with aerial imagery?
22016-03-18 07:15:30 UTCwoodpeck On closer inspection, you have even added new totally fictional roads like this: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/403435390 - I find this very concerning since you are a prolific editor. Please explain how this has happened, and how we can identify other changesets added by you that also contain fi...
32016-03-18 16:49:08 UTCdbusse Hi woodpeck,

tried to check what i did.
Looks like i tried to make something completely wrong, "less wrong".
I assumed some good faith in the data (as local knowledge or something mysterious...) and tried to fix missing intersections, overlaps, self intersecting highways, ...
In doi...
12016-03-16 19:22:11 UTCwoodpeck This change is not acceptable. OSM maps countries as they call itself, not as others call them.
22016-03-16 19:23:52 UTCwoodpeck_repair This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 37880871 where the changeset comment is:
12016-03-09 04:05:33 UTCd1g Hello!

I plan to re-add Equator and Modern prime meridian, because there were never agreement on "constructed geometries" in the past.

Personally, I don't think that this is THAT important.

Similar objects in the past include

name=Geographic South Pole
-90,0, 0,0
http://www.o...
22016-03-09 06:41:23 UTCwoodpeck Please don't add constructed geometries to OSM. They will be removed and, if you continue to disregard this rule, your account will be blocked.
32016-03-09 09:37:26 UTCd1g > They will be removed


> disregard this rule
This isn't OSM rule. There no community agreement on this.

You clearly disrespect all discussions about this topic.

And repeating very same statement about "constructed geometries" without any proofs or explanation where or wh...
42016-03-09 10:41:14 UTCd1g Hello again!

Please, explain your concerns why Anti-meredian should be in OSM(http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3237094) , but Prime meridian isn't?

Russian speaking users would like to hear your point, if you have any.

ATM, we don't have good explanation to enter only one half and not ...
52016-03-09 10:47:24 UTCwoodpeck You are right, the Anti-Meridian is similarly constructed and hence I have removed it. Because of the limitations of our software, those parts of the A.M. that intersect administrative boundaries had to remain.
62016-03-09 10:57:24 UTCd1g Excuse me,
> is similarly constructed

but it makes no sense for South pole:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2480805007/history

Wikipedia says:
The geographic coordinates of the South Pole are usually given simply as 90°S, since its longitude is geometrically undefined and irrel...
12016-03-07 08:28:45 UTCmalcolmh OSM have requested that depth data should not be put into their DB. Depths may be added to sunken objects, but not isolated spot depth soundings or depth contours. Therefore please delete these nodes.
22016-03-08 16:28:57 UTCkallekaden Hi malcolmh,
excuse, I am German and have not possibly understood properly. is there to your request closer information?
32016-03-08 22:42:48 UTCwoodpeck Meerestiefen als Punktdaten mappen wir eigentlich nicht - wir mappen es, wenn irgendwo ein Wrack auf 123 Meter Tiefe liegt, aber nicht, wie tief das Wasser an einer beliebigen Stelle ist.
42016-03-11 10:32:56 UTCkallekaden hi woodpeck,
eine beliebige Stelle ist das nicht. Die Punkte kennzeichnen ein natürliches Fahrwasser, welches alljährlich von ca. 100 Seglern benutzt wird. Viele davon landen dabei auf den umliegenden Sandbänken.
12016-03-03 17:53:17 UTCd1g +1, we need more links to external data-sources such as Wikipedia and Wikidata
22016-03-03 19:13:21 UTCВладимир К Почему бы тогда не занести все меридианы? и вообще всю координатную сетку? Что вы делаете вообще? Вы понимаете, что это мусор в базе?
32016-03-03 21:15:13 UTCd1g Не мусор, отмечается тег Wikidata.

Да, можно внести хоть все меридианы.
42016-03-04 20:32:30 UTCwoodpeck I will revert this changeset again. I am doing so in my role as a member of OSMF's data working group. Please don't add constructed geometries to OSM or I will have to block your account.
52016-03-04 20:34:01 UTCwoodpeck_repair This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 37616244 where the changeset comment is: revert constructed geometries.
62016-03-09 03:57:30 UTCd1g As member of DWG group, woodpeck should wait until community consensus on topic will be settled or discussed well enough.

Instead, woodpeck immediately reverted changeset without ANY new arguments and also threatened a user with ban.

The only argument woodpeck used is "revert constructed ...
12016-02-21 22:47:04 UTCwoodpeck Hallo geofoxx, Du scheinst eine Menge Details in Wales einzutragen, möglicherweise mit Ortskenntnis von einem kürzlichen Urlaub oder so etwas. Ich sehe, dass einige Mapper vor Ort Dich deswegen angeschrieben haben (weil sie gern sicher stellen möchten, dass alles mit rechten Dingen zu...
12016-02-13 21:41:52 UTCwoodpeck Der deutsche Name von Kaliningrad ist "Kaliningrad" und nicht "Königsberg", ich habe das bereits in einer längeren Diskussion mit dem User "Fritz18" erklärt: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/36328757

Bitte ausserdem "source=Atlas" pr&a...
12016-02-04 00:21:12 UTCwoodpeck This reverst Hong Kong highway type changes and several other problems as reported to DWG by jc86035. Note, some objects outside the Hong Kong region were accidentally modified by this changeset and then changed back again.
12016-02-01 04:33:16 UTCjc86035 Please stop retagging trunk roads as highway=motorway. If a road doesn't have the green highway signs then it should be tagged as highway=trunk (or highway=trunk_link for ramps/slip roads and Penny's Bay Highway), and if it doesn't have a route number then it should be tagged as highway=primary (exc...
22016-02-02 08:58:41 UTC00crashtest A road need not have green signs or government designation to be a motorway. Look at these links, they call Gloucester Road a motorway, which I do agree.
https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/world/rush-for-cash-after-van-spills-banknotes-on-hong-kong-motorway-6211539

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/worl...
32016-02-02 09:21:42 UTCjc86035 see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/36839404
42016-02-03 22:27:05 UTCwoodpeck I will revert these changes later today. 00crashtest, your contribution is welcome but when you make edits of such scale, don't just do them without discussing it with the community first (through the talk list or another, more local, forum).
12016-02-01 04:50:48 UTCjc86035 Please don't re-tag trunk routes not classified as highways (i.e. with green signs), or not in tunnel areas, as motorways (highway=motorway). These roads should be tagged as trunk roads (highway=trunk).
22016-02-01 16:45:17 UTCWest Lake Apologies. I was assuming because they met all criteria for motorways they should be upgraded for routing consistency as well as rendering consistency. Is there a resource you use to verify which roads are trunk vs. motorway? (i.e. list of route names/classifications)

Thanks
-W
32016-02-02 06:40:52 UTCjc86035 OSM Wiki page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/HK:Hong_Kong_tagging#.E8.A1.97.E9.81.93.E5.88.86.E9.A1.9E_Classifications_of_streets

Generally, expressways in Hong Kong are distinguished by green destination signs and kilometre markings. Most of them are part of the route system, but two (Penn...
42016-02-02 13:17:45 UTCjc86035 FYI the reason the situation currently looks so inconsistent is because user 00crashtest, for some reason, decided without any community discussion whatsoever to tag every road without an at-grade intersection as highway=motorway. I have asked data@openstreetmap.org to revert this change, per https:...
52016-02-03 22:24:44 UTCwoodpeck I'll attempt to fix this later today.
12016-01-30 15:31:27 UTCwoodpeck Dear Sabeeh Sabir Baz, your import does not comply with our import rules (see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines). The source and license are unclear, and previous discussion has not happened. There are technical issues with your import (importing lots of nodes first, and matching ...
12016-01-27 08:11:19 UTCwoodpeck Hallo, was genau meinst Du mit "Nein und nochmals nein" im Changeset-Kommentar? Ist das die Antwort auf die Frage, ob Deine Edits einen Sinn haben ;) welchen Sinn verfolgst Du beispielsweise mit https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/393920402, wo Du einen "admin_level" aber kein &quo...
22016-01-27 10:40:01 UTCwambacher ach ja, deine "Aktivitäten" werden bereits im Forum diskutiert: http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=53463

es sieht danach aus, dass deine Edits (von "euren" brauch ich ja wohl nicht reden) demnächst komplett revertet (gelöscht) werden könnten. ...
32016-02-04 17:26:33 UTCNakaner This and all other changesets of user bope have been completely reverted. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/37002859
12016-01-14 21:10:56 UTCtkedt Dear Frederik,
your changeset left 69 villages in Poland (plus possibly other places that I do not monitor) without the "name" attribute. Here is an example: http://osm.mapki.com/history/node.php?id=692620929.
Please repair this asap. Thank you.
22016-01-14 21:27:29 UTCwoodpeck Hi tkedt, indeed I see my script had a bug and was a bit over-zealous in places. I am working on a fix.
32016-01-14 21:49:50 UTCwoodpeck_repair This changeset accidentally deleted some perfectly ok tags from 100 objects, and these were reinstated in 36581272
42016-01-15 07:32:03 UTCtkedt Thank you for the quick fix. Nevertheless, two villages are still affected: http://osm.mapki.com/history/node.php?id=373901512, http://osm.mapki.com/history/node.php?id=359947037
12015-09-29 13:49:38 UTCPolarbear Der historische deutsche Name ist bereits in "old_name:de" beschrieben. Warum versuchst du den aktuellen deutschen Namen in "name:de" auf den historischen Wert zu setzen? (Bsp. Kaliningrad https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/27048976 , Mamonwo https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/60...
22015-09-29 20:30:01 UTCFritz18 Weil die offizielle deutsche Bezeichnung für die russische Stadt Kaliningrad eben bis heute Königsberg lautet und daher der mehrsprachige Name auf Deutsch Königsberg lautet. Hier ist er nicht nur irgendein historischer Name, genauso wenig wie Mailand, Florenz oder Prag für die S...
32015-09-30 23:45:59 UTCPolarbear Was ist die Quelle der besagten heutigen "offiziellen deutschen Bezeichnung"?

Die Beispiele der anderen genannten Städte passen nicht, da es Eindeutschungen des originalsprachlichen Namens sind, und keine Ergebnisse von Umbenennungen.
42015-10-01 07:22:04 UTCFritz18 In den öffentlich-rechtlichen Fernseh- und Radiosendern werden grundsätzlich die amtlichen Namen für im Ausland gelegene Orte und Länder verwendet. In der Tagesschau werden Sie niemals Wroclaw, Gdansk oder Szczecin in Kartendarstellungen der Nachrichtensendungen lesen oder von Sp...
52016-01-12 13:33:28 UTCwoodpeck Die offizielle deutsche Bezeichnung für die Stadt Kaliningrad ist Kaliningrad und nicht Königsberg. Das ist bei Gdansk anders, das heisst tatsächlich heute noch auf Deutsch Danzig. (Ebenso bei Wroclaw oder Szczecin.) Daher darf Gdansk auch ein name:de=Danzig haben, Kaliningrad muss si...
62016-01-13 08:14:06 UTCFritz18 Hallo!
Die Kritik an der Nutzung des „tag“ „name:de“ ist unbegründet.

Königsberg ist der offizielle deutsche Name der seit 1945 zu Russland gehörenden Stadt und eben nicht lediglich ein historischer Name. Deshalb ist diese Stadt – sowie im Übrig...
72016-01-13 09:26:02 UTCwoodpeck Hallo Fritz18, es ist mir egal, ob Du meine Begründung akzeptierst oder nicht; Du wirst Dich daran halten müssen oder Dir ein anderes Betätigungsfeld suchen. Ich wiederhole: "name:de" an Straßen nur, wenn vor Ort Schilder sind, und "name:de" an Städten n...
82016-01-13 19:45:04 UTCgeow Hallo Fritz18,
name:de=* hat nicht die Funktion deutschsprachigen Touristen im Ausland die Orientierung zu erleichtern, insbesondere nicht in Staaten, die vom Nazi-Regime überfallen wurden.
92016-01-13 23:32:01 UTCwoodpeck_repair Edits in this changeset have partly been reverted or modified in 36561697 after complaints to DWG.
102016-01-17 23:47:16 UTCFritz18 1.
Wo kann man diese (wann durch wen getroffene? )Regelung für die OSM-Karten zu den mehrsprachigen Straßenbezeichnungen nachlesen. Wo kann man die damalige Diskussion einsehen, so dass man die vorgebrachten Argumente für diese Entscheidung in Erfahrung bringen kann?

Die Ihnen g...
12016-01-12 18:37:15 UTCElliottPlack some of these, such as http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/227128783 seem to be part of ways that don't need to be deleted. Any chance for a partial revert?
22016-01-12 19:56:12 UTCwoodpeck Don't understand - the changeset did not delete any ways, just removed some tags from nodes. The node you pointed out seems to have been part of a way that was deleted 7 months ago in http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/21117928/history
12016-01-12 13:16:12 UTCwoodpeck Lieber Fritz18, bitte verwende das "name:de"-Tag ausschliesslich für noch heute gültige Namen. Kaliningrad heißt seit 1946 auf Deutsch "Kaliningrad" und nicht "Königsberg". Wenn Du den alten Namen aufzeichnen willst, benutze dafür "old_nam...
22016-01-12 13:27:44 UTCPolarbear Wir hatten das in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/34066712 bereits kommentiert, du hast den name:de-Wert hier schon mehrfach umgesetzt.
32016-01-13 08:11:35 UTCFritz18 Hallo!

1.
Ihre Kritik an der Nutzung des „tag“ „name:de“ ist unbegründet.

Königsberg ist der offizielle deutsche Name der seit 1945 zu Russland gehörenden Stadt und eben nicht lediglich ein historischer Name. Deshalb ist diese Stadt – sowie im &Uu...
42016-01-13 11:59:43 UTCPolarbear Das Auswärtige Amt der BRD unterhält ein Generalkonsulat in Kaliningrad
http://www.germania.diplo.de/Vertretung/russland/de/04-kali/0-gk.html und http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/cae/servlet/contentblob/332372/publicationFile/212292/DtAuslandsvertretungenListe.pdf .

Du vermischst in dein...
52016-01-13 23:32:13 UTCwoodpeck_repair Edits in this changeset have partly been reverted or modified in 36561697 after complaints to DWG.
12016-01-11 22:06:05 UTCwoodpeck Dear testerx1, I am writing in my capacity as a member of OSMF's Data Working Group. It is against OSM's rules to delete correct information. That this information pertains to objects in military or restricted areas is not reason enough to delete them. Please do not perform such deletions in the pas...
12016-01-06 16:55:57 UTCwoodpeck_repair This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 36407926 where the changeset comment is: revert un-discussed mechanical edit
22016-01-06 17:00:27 UTCwoodpeck Please stop making these types of edits. "Gardening" is ok as long as you actually look at the individual objects you're editing. Loading a large number of objects through Taginfo/Overpass and mass-changing one property is not ok. A number of objects changed in this changeset have tags tha...
12015-12-27 16:46:20 UTCArlas Solo nodi cancellati senza motivo
22016-01-03 11:17:32 UTCwoodpeck Dear user "select", could you please explain why you deleted these nodes? Are you the same person as "gnuckx"?
32016-01-05 12:40:09 UTCgnuckx which nodes exactly?
42016-01-05 16:45:45 UTCwoodpeck There were 93 nodes deleted in this changeset and the comment given - "trace" - is insufficient to explain. Data Working Group has received a complaint about this and other deletions performed by you and user "select", and we're considering to revert all your edits made with mean...
52016-01-05 16:52:29 UTCgnuckx the garbage dumpers in the city are illegal as of eu law and they are being removed by the catania city hall by implementing a door to door garbage collect system. moreover it is totally disproportionate to put 5 6 or 7 dumpers in the collecting same point for every single dumper in OSM. it is total...
62016-01-05 18:27:51 UTCArlas 1) "overbloating" is not this case where object are mapped by people that follows osm wiki rules
2) openstreetmap is not a simple "map" of things that you wish in and wish not. It's a more complex geodatabase. If someone puts data inside, that's useful data. Moreover if someone ...
72016-01-06 00:43:46 UTCwoodpeck gnuckx, you have used the changeset comment "trace" instead of, what now seems more appropriate, "deleting garbage dumpers because they will be removed". Why? Also, in this changeset you deleted other things for example http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2431432250 - why? -- As a ...
12016-01-03 11:12:04 UTCwoodpeck What is going on here? You are deleting 56 nodes and the changeset comment is "shelter"? What does that mean? Is it a mistake?
12015-12-26 09:23:48 UTCNakaner Schön, dass du einen Editwar anfängst. Aber der von mir revertierte Änderungssatz (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/36163944) war in Teilen einfaches mechanisches Umtaggen. Hättest du die von dir bearbeiteten Objekte genauer angesehen, wären dir syntaktisch falsche Te...
22015-12-27 17:22:56 UTCatpl_pilot Und wenn Du Dich mit meinem Änderungssätzen in den letzten Tagen beschäftigt hättest, dann hättest Du erkennen müssen, das ich systematisch gemäß DPAG und berlinadd.morbz.de alle Adressen berichtige. Wenn hierbei - und wenn auch auch nur Teile eines Edits sin...
32015-12-27 19:24:25 UTCwoodpeck Ein mechenischer Edit liegt dann vor, wenn jemand im Blindflug das Tag A gegen das vermeintlich richtigere Tag B austauscht, ohne auf den Einzelfall zu achten. Solche Edits sind unerwünscht bzw. erfordern vorherige Diskussion. Deine hier vorgenommene Änderung, atpl_pilot, ist *offensichtli...
42016-01-02 14:30:39 UTCatpl_pilot Das wäre dann der Fall, wenn ich umtaggen würde und mich dann nicht mehr weiter um diese Daten kümmern würde. Das tue ich jedoch nicht. Ich gehe gans systematisch eine Adresse nach der anderen durch und kontrolliere die Angaben. Es macht nur wenig Sinn, ständig "contact...
12015-12-09 08:40:10 UTCwoodpeck This footway is not really visible on aerial imagery. Are you sure that there is a footway there, and is it publicly accessible or perhaps just a private path? We had a complaint at DWG saying that using this footway would amount to trespassing.
12015-12-09 07:03:52 UTCwoodpeck This changeset appears to have introduced a large number of geometry errors (intersecting inner rings etc.), for example ways 329019306 and 329019257. I was looking at repairing it but it seems a lot of work cleaning up after broken software ;( i wonder if I should just revert the changeset.
22015-12-09 12:48:31 UTCVort There is no need to revert this change. I have fixed most of the problems for this lake.
32015-12-09 16:00:07 UTCmalenki Thank you for finding and fixing the issues.
I am sorry to have caused that work. It seems in one of my last uploads in this region I wasn't as careful as I use to be. Due to the lack of time I haven't continued my work on Lake Nasser and so failed to see the introduced issues myself.
12015-12-06 18:59:25 UTCwoodpeck Bitte unterlasse die (hier noch dazu völlig sachfremde) Herabwürdigung anderer Nutzer ("Spezialist aus Dresden").
12015-11-28 09:51:41 UTCwoodpeck In this changeset you have moved hundreds of trees. Was that intentional?
22015-11-28 09:52:56 UTCwoodpeck Ah sorry, I see it now - not moved but re-tagged.
12015-11-12 08:00:34 UTCwoodpeck Hallo Oderplantscher, hast Du von Netto eine Genehmigung zum Abschreiben von Daten von deren Webseite, oder steht auf der Webseite ausdrücklich, dass die Weiterverwendung der Daten erlaubt ist? Ansonsten gilt nämlich - selbst dann, wenn die Seite öffentlich abrufbar ist - das Datenban...
22015-11-12 09:12:04 UTCoderplantscher Die Daten wurden nicht abgeschrieben, sondern es wurde nur geprüft, ob es sich um den "roten" oder den "schwarzen" Netto handelt und der jeweilige Betreiber eingetragen und die dazugehörige Internetseite einetragen. Die Punkte bzw. Gebäude stammen aus OSM. Die erg&...
32015-11-12 10:58:51 UTCwoodpeck Hm, woher kommt dann z.B. im Way 39353090 die Info, dass es sich um die Hausnummer 31a handelt? Das war ja OSM nicht zu entnehmen. Woher kommen die Öffnungszeiten z.B. in Way 172830358, warst Du vor Ort in Polen, um das zu prüfen?
42015-11-12 11:23:04 UTCoderplantscher Wenn sich die genannte Internetseite ansieht, wird man von dieser die Informationen nicht bekommen. Aber vielleicht sollte ich die Datensätze rückgangig machen, umweitere Diskussionen zu vermeiden.
12015-11-12 08:15:49 UTCwoodpeck It appears unlikely that "Adam's house" is the correct name tag for this house. Should it officially have that name, then "addr:housename" instead of "name" would be suitable. Otherwise, remove the tag altogether.
12015-11-12 08:11:23 UTCwoodpeck I note that in this changeset with a description of "popul 20c x3" (what does that mean?), you have added a postal code and elevation to a town in Mexico. Where does that data come from? You are making a lot of edits across the world and it seems unlikely to me that you actually have first...
22015-11-15 13:31:01 UTCAleks-Berlin (sorry for the delay, I was in holidays.)
the source of fixing it is mainly the OSM-wiki + TagWatch (e.g. population=20,000 to 20000) and OSM database itself (is_in:iso, is_in).
I try to make OSM data easy useable (e.g. no comma , ; inside integer values, or pop=20 habitants, means no useless unit...
12015-11-07 01:57:48 UTCwoodpeck Dear avatar6: Please stop making these large-scale mechanical edits. It is inconceivable that you actually looked at the objects you were editing - this is a blind replacement of one thing with another. Also, your changeset comments don't adequately explain what you're doing; "fx" or "...
22015-11-10 20:09:53 UTCavatar6 Dear wóodpeck, pls., specify what my do'ings exactly concerns you. I'm surely knew, what I did, cause landuse=wood - is mistakengly landuse=forest, or, more comongly natural=wood, or you know other usage?? f 'couse I looked every object edited enauph for replacing tags...
fx stands for 'fix...
32015-11-10 20:20:36 UTCwoodpeck I think you're making general assumptions about tags instead of looking at the individual situation. Also, the changeset comments are aimed at your fellow mappers. Neither "fx str" nor "fix street" are sufficient to explain *what* you think you were fixing.
42015-11-10 20:42:01 UTCavatar6 yeah, u r right. Most .my changesets in my home country Ukraine, I think I should comment it like that 'изменил имя улиці согласно оффициального перечня горсовета'. ) I apologe if doing smthng wrong for you, but I was trying my best wishes.
52015-11-10 20:50:06 UTCSomeoneElse Hi avatar6, with regard to http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/375035/history , how did you know whether to use natural=wood rather than landuse=forest here? On http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Forest there are four (!) conflicting approaches documented for tagging wood vs forest - it would be ...
62015-11-10 20:51:37 UTCSomeoneElse Oops - typing fail above - "some of this obviously planted for forestry, so not obviously" should have been "... some not obviously".
12015-10-06 19:58:28 UTCuser_7622 Hallo
Du hast den Status der B31 Umgehung von proposed auf construction zurück geändert. Wie ich in Changeset 32023406 geschrieben habe, wird sich dieses Jahr nichts sichtbares tun, frühestens nächstes Jahr, weil noch nicht einmal die Pläne für die Brücken fertig ...
22015-10-06 20:14:50 UTCuser_7622 Wie auf http://www.friedrichshafen.de/wirtschaft-verkehr/b-31-neu/pressemitteilungen/news-detail/datum/2015/08/07/b-31-neu-liegt-im-zeitplan-fertigstellung-2020-geplant/ zu lesen geht es erst Ende nächsten Jahres richtig los, von der Ausgleichsfläche abgesehen. Ich meine über ein Jahr...
32015-10-07 05:00:24 UTCGarryX3D Hallo,
darüber gab es schon sehr viele Diskussionen.
Weitläufig üblich und sinnvoll ist es Straßen bis zum Planfeststellungsbeschluß als "proposed", mit Erteilung des Baurechts als "construction" einzutragen. Aktuelle Bautätigkeiten können ...
42015-10-07 05:26:34 UTCuser_7622 Hallo,
mindestens ein Apfelfeld in dem zukünftigen Baugebiet wird noch eine Fruchfolge erleben, bis Oktober 2016 wird dort also wirklich _nichts_ von einer Strasse zu sehen sein. Könntest du mal einen Verweis auf die Diskussionen geben, dass es sinnvoll ist, auch in solchen Fällen di...
52015-10-07 06:27:53 UTCGarryX3D Grenzen sind auch nicht sichtbar und wir mappen sie.
Highway=construction mappt ja keine Baustelle sondern eine in Bau befindliche Straße. Das ist ein Unterschied!
Da der offizielle Spatenstich stattgefunden hat ist das auch für jedermann nachvollziehbar/nachlesbar.
Bei solchen Bauproj...
62015-10-07 10:01:22 UTCuser_7622 Hallo

So weit ich das mitbekommen habe, sind aber Grenzen oder Postleitzahlenbezirke eine Ausnahme, eben weil sie nicht zu sehen sind.

Im Wiki heißt es: "Use this tag to denote active construction sites (for projects being planned, where there is little or no evidence for them on t...
72015-10-08 20:00:33 UTCGarryX3D Hallo,
mit Erteilung des Planfeststellungsbeschlußes ist die Planung abgeschloßen. Mit Erteilung des Baurechts und ganz sicher mit dem ersten Spatenstich ist der Bau begonnen. Dass die Bagger nicht gleich an allen Stellen gleichzeitig zubeisen, bei so großen Projekten an manchen S...
82015-10-08 20:14:39 UTCNakaner Es gibt Bauprojekte, die planfestgestellt sind, aber trotzdem noch eine Weile ihrer Realisierung harren. Willst du die Daten mit lauter highway/railway=construction vollpflastern? OSM ist eine Abbildung der Realität und nicht irgendwelcher Fantasien/Traumzuständen von Planungsbehörden...
92015-10-08 21:27:01 UTCGarryX3D Realität ist dass hier eine Straße in Bau ist - amtlich bestätigt. Was will Du mehr?
Von vollpflastern kann keine Rede sein, soviele Projekte gibt es nicht.
Das tagging in dieser Form ist schon lange Jahre üblich.
Wenn die Planfestellung durch ist dann sind das keine "F...
102015-10-09 06:40:18 UTCuser_7622 Hallo
Im Wiki (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:construction) dokumentiert ist, dass, solange nichts von aktiven Bautätigkeiten (ja sogar dann noch wenn schon ein wenig davon) in der Natur zu sehen ist, Strassenbaustellen als 'proposed' getaggt werden sollen. Da in OSM nicht die Erteilun...
112015-10-11 00:19:53 UTCGarryX3D Nochmal:
Mit der aktuellen Landnutzung hat das nichts zu tun - das wird über landuse erfasst und kann durchaus Baufortschrittsabhängig erfasst werden.
Es ist aber langjährig üblich entsprechend den Planfeststellungsabschnitten jeweils den kompletten Abschnitt als "geplant&...
122015-10-12 11:41:48 UTCNakaner @GarryX3D: user_7622 hat zu diesem Changeset einen Thread im deutschen OSM-Forum gestartet. http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=52342
132015-11-03 21:00:13 UTCwoodpeck GarryX3D, eine Straße ist dann im Bau, wenn man vor Ort sehen kann, dass eine Strasse gebaut wird, und nicht wenn irgendwo ein Bach verlegt wird, um vielleicht mal Platz für eine Straße zu machen. Bitte lasse user_7622 gewähren, sein Vorgehen entspricht auch dem Tenor im Forum....
142015-11-05 00:36:30 UTCGarryX3D Frederik, zumindest Dein zweiter Teil ist kompletter Unsinn! Die meisten Straßenbaustellen kann man zu Fuss durchqueren - ob man es darf ist ein anderes Thema.
Der gesamte Abschnitt ist rund 7km lang - es spielt sich also alles im Umkreis von 3,5km bezogen auf die Mitte ab.
Nach Deinem angel...
152015-11-05 11:40:01 UTCuser_7622 Du hattest nach deinen letzten Änderungen den neuen Strassenverlauf im gemischen Zustand bezüglich primary/trunk hinterlassen, unter anderem waren die ways 245050726 und 315454158 von dir eh schon als als primary getaggt.
Desweitern, wie ich aber auch schon schrieb, heisst es im Wiki unt...
162015-11-05 13:06:17 UTCuser_7622 Noch ein Nachtrag, da es eine so schöne Seite extra für die Attributierung von Strassen in Deutschland gibt: Hier http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Attributierung_von_Stra%C3%9Fen_in_Deutschland#Bundesstra.C3.9Fen kannst du nachlesen, wie die Dokumentation für Bundesstrassen ist, und...
172015-11-05 13:10:58 UTCwoodpeck Das könnte man ja auch dann diskutieren, wenn das Ding fertig gebaut ist ;)
182015-11-05 14:15:56 UTCuser_7622 Das hört sich gut an, erst mal warten und dann anschauen, wie gross der Unterschied zwischen Planung und Wirklichkeit ist ;-) Zumal es die Diskussion auf einem schon bestehenden Stück (way 306858429) mit changesets https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27981391 und https://www.openstree...
192015-11-05 21:35:29 UTCGarryX3D @user_7622 Du hast schon eine merkwürdige Argumentation, auf der einen Seite möchtest Du construction nur exakt dort sehen wo schon ein Bagger tätig wurde, auf der anderen Seite möchtest Du die feineren Abstufungsschritte für die großen Verkehrswege nicht Nutzen bzw. v...
202015-11-05 21:44:07 UTCGarryX3D Abgesehen davon lese ich in Deinem Verweis ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Attributierung_von_Stra%C3%9Fen_in_Deutschland#Bundesstra.C3.9Fen) keine Begründung warum der Abschnitt kein trunk/ Schnellstraße werden sollte.
212015-11-05 23:28:34 UTCuser_7622 Da möchte die Seite eines Harald Hartmann Zugriff auf meine Benutzereinstellungen. Die gewähre ich ihm natürlich nicht, ohne genau zu wissen was das soll. Kannst du mir auch so erzählen was ich denn dort lesen könnte?
222015-11-05 23:42:49 UTCuser_7622 Bezüglich feiner Abstufungsschritte: Die Umgehung B30/B32 von Ravensburg, um hier in der Nähe zu bleiben, hat zum Beispiel Beschilderung und Ausbau einer 'gelben Autobahn' und ist meiner Meinung nach richtig und zu recht als trunk gekennzeichnet. Aber so 'dick' wird die Umgehung von Friedr...
232015-11-05 23:46:31 UTCGarryX3D Jojo4u möchte wissen:
Soll für die Klassifizierung von highway=trunk in Deutschland nur die Höhenfreiheit das verbindliche Kriterium sein?

Momentan ist trunk im Wiki (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway%3Dtrunk) als "autobahnähnliche" "Schnellstr...
242015-11-06 00:53:16 UTCGarryX3D Nun , sie ist kreuzungsfrei mit 2+2 Verkehrsführung projektiert.
Erfüllt also alle notwendigen Anforderungen unter Deinem Link für "Schnellstraßen".
Was fehlt Dir noch für "trunk"?
12015-11-03 19:05:58 UTCwoodpeck Dear Carrot Killer, I have trouble believing that there is really an establishment called "Dead Hooker Inn" at this location. Can you point me to any evidence that corrborates this? -- As you are surely aware, OSM is for collecting facts not fiction, and if this was meant to be a joke at t...
12015-11-01 18:14:56 UTCwoodpeck In this and your 5 other changesets you have deleted a lot of data from OSM, and we had to undo your edit. Please remember that OSM is one database shared by all - if you delete data then it is gone for everyone not just you. Welcome to OSM - and please be careful ;)
12015-10-30 11:11:25 UTCwoodpeck Kannst Du mal genauer erklären, was Du hier gerade tust? "Erg/Änderg POIs" ist mir irgendwie ein bisschen zu dünn. Warum hast Du z.B. hier den Namen "Marienkirche" entfernt?
12015-10-23 10:41:19 UTCbigbug21 Hallo Nakaner,
bei einigen Ergänzungen auf der Neubaustrecke stach mir gerade dieser Änderungsdatensatz ins Auge. Ich verstehe nicht, warum du die von mir mühevoll eingepflegten Quellenangaben einfach herausgelöscht hast und bitte dich, sie wiederherzustellen. Es gab keinen ersi...
22015-10-23 17:23:50 UTCNakaner Ich habe gerade meine Aufzeichnungen von damals (Notizzettel) hervorgeholt und noch einmal meinen Änderungssatz geprüft. Abgesehen von km 242,2 (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3220450201/history) habe ich alle Hektometertafeln, an denen ich note=*, source=* usw. entfernt habe, selbst u...
32015-10-23 18:19:44 UTCKakaner Ach so, der source-Tag dient dazu, Rechenschaft gegenüber dem Führer der OSM, Nakaner, abzulegen? Wieder was gelernt.
42015-10-23 19:53:50 UTCbigbug21 Hallo Nakaner,
ich verstehe einfach nicht, warum du Informationen von anderen Mappern, die nicht falsch sind und einen informativen Mehrwert bieten, einfach herauslöschst, nur weil sie deiner Meinung nach unnötig sind. Es wäre schön, wenn du das bei weiteren Änderungen unte...
52015-10-23 20:45:23 UTCKakaner Anscheinend hat sich Nakaner wieder über mich beschwert. Sollte ich für das Wort "Führer" gesperrt werden, wäre das der Witz des Jahres. Ich bin gespannt. Gut, vielleicht hätte ich besser "Leiter" oder "Chef" geschrieben. Das klingt freundlicher...
62015-10-23 21:56:33 UTCPeda Hallo PeterDRS,

nicht Nakaner hat sich beschwert, sondern ich habe dich jetzt wiederholt darum gebeten und aufgefordert auf einer sachlichen Ebene zu bleiben oder dich andernfalls herauszuhalten. Du hast mit diesem Changeset nichts zu tun sondern nutzt ihn zur Provokation.

Wenn du das ausdisk...
72015-10-23 22:00:36 UTCKakaner Ich wurde von einem Betroffenen ausdrücklich auf diesen Änderungssatz aufmerksam gemacht.
Nach dem Motto: "Betroffen ist einer, gemeint sind wir alle." finde ich, dass eine Demokratie Meinungsäußerungen aushalten muss.
Es ist für mich ein Zeichen von Zivilcourag...
82015-10-23 22:28:44 UTCwoodpeck PeterDRS, "dem Betroffenen verbal beistehen", indem man herumpöbelt, ist keine Zivilcourage. Hättest Du statt Nakaner anzugreifen beispielsweise gesagt: "Ich finde auch, dass solche Quellangaben erhalten bleiben sollten.", dann hätte sich niemand beschwert. Aber Di...
92015-10-23 22:31:07 UTCKakaner Nakaner führt sich grundsätzlich, immer und überall hier als Chef auf.
Von daher ist es durchaus eine Autorität, die man bekämpfen darf.
Er revertiert alles, was nicht bei drei auf den Bäumen ist.
Er fordert von allen und jedem immer Quellenangaben. Nur wenn er selbs...
102015-10-23 22:51:20 UTCPeda Das ist hier erst mal nicht von Belang, da es um deine unsachliche Einmischung zu Diskussionbeginn ging, die ich nicht akzeptiere. Wenn du einen undiskutierten Revert oder fehlende oder zweifelhafte Quellenangaben entdeckst und das nicht friedlich mit dem Benutzer klären kannst, kannst du das g...
112015-10-23 22:52:49 UTCKakaner Also antworten auf hier entstehende Fragen ist gar nicht erlaubt?
122015-10-23 22:54:06 UTCKakaner Ich möchte diese Sperre gerne haben, das wäre für mich eine Genugtuung und ein Kunstprojekt. "Gesperrt wegen Beleidigung von Nakaner." Besser geht es gar nicht.
132015-10-24 07:43:53 UTCubahnverleih Um mal wieder auf die eigentliche Diskussion zurück zu kommen: ich halte es auch nicht für gut, wenn die source Hinweise gelöscht werden, weil EIN mapper sie verifiziert hat. Gerade wenn später mal Umbauten stattfinden und man schauen will ob und welche Sachen geändert werde...
142015-10-24 08:43:01 UTCNakaner Da ich mich der Mehrheit beuge, habe ich die gelöschten note=* und source=* wiederhergestellt. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/34836925

source=* habe ich dabei ein wenig angepasst. Bei einer Tafel schrieb bigbug21, ihr Oberleitungsmast sei auf den damaligen Bing-Bildern nicht erkennb...
152015-10-24 14:41:19 UTCbigbug21 Vielen Dank!
12015-10-01 11:13:14 UTCkarussell Please review as this road is clearly too long!
22015-10-01 11:14:10 UTCkarussell I get:
infinity distance? for way:356352472
infinity distance? for way:360780242
:)
32015-10-06 14:29:05 UTCSimonPoole @apcroads I hope you realize that your additions are at odds with the import guidelines in multiple aspects http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines and are likely to be wholesale reverted if you don't quickly make amends.
42015-10-06 14:30:46 UTCapcroads Simon, the roads have been deleted.
52015-10-06 15:05:03 UTCwoodpeck I have recommended discussing this import on the imports list via https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/817
62015-10-10 10:12:41 UTCSomeoneElse @apcroads some of the roads imported here are still present and problematical. For example, is the name of
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/355479605 really "worthey 14-16h"? Should it actually be joined to http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/355479592 (and is that really called "wor...
12015-09-21 21:51:12 UTClcmortensen Ways deleted or shortened partially due to carelessness of reverter (list is incomplete)
way 3469285
way 292150815
way 367741232
way 367742752
way 367742755
way 367742820
way 367747455
way 367747458
way 367786116
way 367786117
way 367786118
way 367786120
way 367792699
way 36...
22015-09-22 22:15:17 UTCwoodpeck Changeset 34193524 makes an attempt to fix the broken geometries that this revert left behind.
12015-09-18 19:12:42 UTClcmortensen This edit over-reverted and ended up removing a number of railway lines rather than just reverting speed limits to mph.
22015-09-19 09:55:17 UTCSomeoneElse @lcmortensen To be fair, if you'd discussed the mechanical edit beforehand and separated it from other work, that wouldn't have happened.
32015-09-20 05:20:58 UTClcmortensen @SomeoneElse It wouldn't have happened if the reverter wasn't lazy.
42015-09-20 08:04:29 UTCwoodpeck @lcmortensen, would it constitue an undue burden on you to share the ID of one of the number of railway lines that this revert has removed?
52015-09-20 21:26:36 UTClcmortensen Here are 26 of them:
way 367741232
way 367742752
way 367742755
way 367742820
way 367786116
way 367786117
way 367786118
way 367786120
way 367792699
way 367790099
way 367790100
way 367790101
way 367790102
way 367790103
way 367790104
way 367790105
way 367790106
way 367790107
way 3677...
62015-09-20 21:27:39 UTClcmortensen Sorry, those were from changeset 33890248.
72015-09-20 21:41:55 UTClcmortensen Also:
way 3469285
way 292150815
way 367747455
way 367747458
12015-09-05 09:48:35 UTCwoodpeck Dear lcmortensen, you are making a tremendous amount of railway edits and for many of them the motivation is unclear. I saw some level_corssings made into crossings, or highway=crossing added to node 2049190592 in this changeset with no obvious reason. Please use changeset comments to explain what y...
12015-08-16 23:45:03 UTCwoodpeck This is a data import that violates our import guidelines because it was neither first discussed on the relevant mailing list (i.e. the imports mailing list), nor is it (and the permission that was granted according to http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Jotam/diary/35579) properly documented on the W...
22015-08-17 06:50:20 UTCJotam This was my first import into OSM, so thanks for the advice on how to do it more according to community standards next time. I will take the time to explain more of it on the imports mailing list. Thanks!
12015-08-11 10:10:30 UTCwoodpeck http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Relationen/Relationen_sind_keine_Kategorien - mir scheint hier eine klassische Sammelrelation angelegt worden zu sein!
22015-08-11 10:12:05 UTCKakaner Na wenn Gerichte nicht hierarchisch aufgebaut sind dann weiß ich auch nicht mehr.

Kategorie: Gericht in Deutschland
12015-07-28 12:11:27 UTCM!dgard The rest of the mapped phone booths in Belgium should be surveyed and if necessary also removed. If they are still present, you can add a note, like 'verified that this phone still exists 2015-07-28'.
22015-07-30 01:03:47 UTCwoodpeck I commented on your diary entry https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/M!dgard/diary/35474 explaining why edits such as this make OSM worse not better. Please don't do it.
12015-07-15 16:25:44 UTCwoodpeck Dear user CanvecImports, I am a little concerned by the speed and volume in which you upload Canvec data. As you are certainly aware, you are expected to be diligent when importing Canvec - checking existing data against what you upload, making sure data is aligned properly, comparing with available...
22015-07-16 14:25:48 UTCCanvecImports Mr Ramm:
I thought I was being pretty diligent. Running validator, merging duplicate nodes and such, joining ways etc.I have to admit that I'm not comparing the data with aerial imagery every time. When I see pockets of "civilization" I do look at the imagery and try to add roads.

...
12015-07-14 20:30:42 UTCwoodpeck It appears that the only change made in this changeset was to rename the "Matterhorn" mountain to "Cervino". The changeset comment is "Correzione dati da rilevamento" which - correct me if I'm wrong - means that you surveyed something. How did you go about surveying for...
12015-06-29 20:42:22 UTCwoodpeck This changeset appears to be an un-discussed and undocumented data import from a source which is likely not ok for use in OSM. Has this import been discussed anywhere before it was run?
22015-06-30 04:56:56 UTCgogeo If data are bad feel free to fallback it anytime.
12015-06-22 08:43:02 UTCwoodpeck It appears that about a million buildings have been imported from RUIAN without this ever being listed in the import catalogue, or on any English-language page on the Wiki. Could this be fixed?
22015-06-29 09:05:57 UTCwasheck The import was discussed on imports mailing list, it is listed on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue (search for RUIAN) and English wiki page at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RUIAN was created in February 2014.
12015-06-16 17:55:21 UTCwoodpeck There appears to be a problem with this import, as it imports obejcts that were explicitly not planned to be imported. See "imports" mailing list. Please do not continue the import until this is resolved.
22015-06-18 13:58:54 UTCcoloredstone The "Slovenia Landcover Import - RABA-KGZ" wiki page has actually not been updated according to the latest decision of the Slovenian group of OSM contributors which has prepared the import. The discussion was quite intensive on the amount of elements to be imported. At the end the decision...
32015-06-18 15:42:33 UTCwoodpeck The import has passed review on the global imports list. If changes have been made later, then the changed proposal needs to be discussed on the imports list, and then the import can be performed. You cannot document one thing and execute another.
42015-06-18 15:59:16 UTCimagico Yes, when you want to import additional data please include this on the wiki and open this for further discussion on the imports ML. Those things indicated for import on the wiki seem mostly solid but those imported beyond that have various issues. Getting input from the international community wi...
12015-06-16 17:56:15 UTCwoodpeck There appears to be a problem with this import, as it imports obejcts that were explicitly not planned to be imported. See "imports" mailing list. Please do not continue the import until this is resolved.
12015-05-19 20:11:31 UTCwoodpeck Wie bist Du bei dieser "Adressenkorrektur" genau vorgegangen? Warum hast Du beispielsweise die Bären-Apotheke http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/69226060/history#map=19/52.51071/13.39092 verschoben? Sie hat zwar die postalische Adresse "Friedrichstr.", der Eingang ist aber vo...
22016-09-26 18:28:34 UTCBladeTC Hey brother, can you fix the wrong color for some of the roofs, who are tagged "red" but they are "grey"?!
Thanks!
32016-09-27 13:48:31 UTCBot45715 nein, ich war vor Ort.
42017-02-17 10:22:11 UTCRoterEmil die Adressen der Botschaften von Chile, Peru und Liechtenstein wurden in diesem CS auf Oranienburger Str. 13 gesetzt. Habe dies wieder geändert. Im Fall von Liechtenstein besonders "schön", da im CS (15738943) selbst die Adresse richtig gesetzt worden war...

auch die Adresse d...
12015-05-13 05:59:23 UTCwoodpeck This appears to me to be an un-discussed and rather useless import, since the roughly 4000 nodes carry no tags that mean anything in OSM. Can you explain?
12015-05-12 05:47:17 UTCwoodpeck Dear user drakopineda, please explain what leads you to assume that there is indeed a lake where you drew "Holoi Lake". Please understand that OpenStreetMap is a shared database of facts, and has no place for fiction.
22015-05-25 06:25:45 UTCruthmaben "Holoi Lake" doesn't appear to exist. Can you please clarify.
32015-05-25 16:50:40 UTCwoodpeck_repair This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 31450935 where the changeset comment is: Revert edits by user drakopineda since some are clearly fictional e.g. changeset 30174273, casting doubt on the veracity of the rest, and no answer was received about it from the user.
12015-05-12 05:45:36 UTCwoodpeck Dear user drakopineda, please explain what leads you to assume that there is a city here. Please understand that OpenStreetMap is a shared database of facts, and has no place for fiction.
22015-05-25 16:50:35 UTCwoodpeck_repair This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 31450935 where the changeset comment is: Revert edits by user drakopineda since some are clearly fictional e.g. changeset 30174273, casting doubt on the veracity of the rest, and no answer was received about it from the user.
12015-04-29 14:33:03 UTC4rch Hello Poshan, please do not upload bulk boundary ways which do not match with the already existing boundaries. Please use boundary relations [1] instead. When you import something you also have to follow the import guidelines [2] and make sure that you do not infringe copyright.

Regards, Arch

...
22015-05-02 21:33:42 UTCwoodpeck I have reverted three admin boundaries that were clearly imported and over-attributed.
32015-05-03 08:11:47 UTCPoshan Okay. I think it is good to revert those imported vdc boundaries.
12015-04-24 13:40:01 UTCandrewsh Teh Wow.
22015-04-24 13:55:41 UTCtrolleway Солсбері
32015-04-24 14:35:00 UTCwoodpeck What is the source of these names? For example, Russian names of "Swadlincote" or "Great Dunmow"? Is there any evidence of these places actually having a name in Russian, or are these just transliterations?
42015-04-24 14:38:08 UTCdudka This should be interesting discussion :D
See the previous one.
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2014-August/thread.html#16294
52015-04-24 14:46:35 UTCKomяpa Hello,

to find russian names for places, I googled for English place names plus "достопримечательности", "погода" or some other russian word. It shows a lot of pages where the name is used, and some of them have russian version.

see for example
...
62015-04-24 14:59:16 UTCwoodpeck Frankly, no - is *any* of these web sites more than a database of transliterated place names? I saw hotel listings, tour operators, and weather pages, all obviously using a generic catalogue of transliterated place names. These sites would generate a place page for any remote village that has a hote...
12015-04-24 08:32:04 UTCwoodpeck Hello StephenDavis, as you probably know all data imports to OSM are subject to our import guidelines (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines) which include, among other things, that a public discussion is required before the import. I cannot immediately see the discussion of your LINZ...
22015-04-24 09:57:45 UTCBryce C Nesbitt The source tag ideally should point to the discussion.
32015-04-24 09:59:53 UTCBryce C Nesbitt And tags like LINZ:dataset=mainland are not tags useful to OSM mappers or consumers. Discussion about tags like that would be the result of creating an import plan in advance, and showing it around.
42015-04-27 22:19:42 UTCStephenDavis Hi, woodpeck and Bryce: this is part of the very long-running LINZ import, which you can see on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/LINZ, tracked on linz2osm.openstreetmap.org.nz. See also the discussion on the nzopengis mailing list https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/nzopengis which is the NZ e...
52015-04-27 22:23:32 UTCStephenDavis Bryce:

These tags are there to allow us to automatically update these features when the source data changes, or we change the tagging formula. The format was discussed when we began the LINZ import.

These tags are not intended to be maintained in OSM. Once other mappers start to touch the data...
62015-04-28 03:56:34 UTCBryce C Nesbitt Could that be collapsed down to a single key?

LINZ:ref=mainland-exotic_poly-123128379

The current one does not have a primary key or object reference to the LINZ dataset.
72015-04-28 03:56:52 UTCBryce C Nesbitt Make that "ref:LINZ"
82015-04-28 04:02:58 UTCStephenDavis > Could that be collapsed down to a single key?

In principle, sure.

It was kept as separate tags to make it easier to query. If you feel strongly about changing the existing scheme, though, I suggest you start a discussion on nzopengis, rather than commenting on a changeset.
92015-04-28 04:04:12 UTCStephenDavis Bear in mind that we did a lot of discussion during the original proposal about how to tag. Robin Paulson was heavily involved in that.
102015-04-28 04:07:06 UTCBryce C Nesbitt My comments are independent of Robin Paulson's. I'm a database person, and have done OSM imports (including controversial ones). I'm not an enemy of imports, but an advocate for good ones.
112015-04-28 04:48:29 UTCStephenDavis Fair enough. There's a lot of background to this, is what I'm saying. This is not a new import, in fact it's been in progress for several years. If you've got things to say about the LINZ import in general, it'd be best to take them to nzopengis and/or the imports list.
122015-05-19 02:40:14 UTCmyfanwy This is not part of the LINZ import, it is completely separate and significantly different. LINZ is a central government department which handles land packets, this appears to be (correct me if I'm wrong), building outlines, from Auckland Council.
132015-05-20 02:40:56 UTCStephenDavis Hi Robin, as we discussed on nzopengis, these data sets from AC and WCC are available under the same terms, and provide a more comprehensive set of the same data. If you want to discuss it further, please do so on osm-import or nzopengis, rather than a random changeset.

On another note, I'm betwe...
12015-04-24 07:04:03 UTCwoodpeck Hello Omnific, as you probably know all data imports to OSM are subject to our import guidelines (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines) which include, among other things, that a public discussion is required before the import. I cannot immediately see the discussion of your Charlotte...
22015-04-24 14:46:13 UTCOmnific Someone else (I think it was BeckerMN_Import or something) contacted me about helping with the imports. I have no idea about how he/she discussed them with the community.
32015-05-01 14:53:31 UTCrickmastfan67 Unfortunately, Becker_MN_Import_Acc never did discuss the import with the community (either via the Wiki or talk-us/imports). He even got blocked (see: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/596 ) for a short time because of the mass import. Some of the import he did in Charlotte even duplicate...
42015-05-02 02:39:14 UTCwoodpeck_repair This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 30706685, 30705742, 30707787, 30707005, 30706320, 30708240, 30708754, 30707415 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed building import
12015-04-10 20:59:27 UTCAmaroussi Can you please explain what justifies using Latin refs for a country where the Greek alphabet is mainly in use? Thanks in advance.
22015-04-15 08:32:01 UTCwoodpeck I second Amaroussi's concerns; can you give a reason for making this change? Else I suggest it should be reverted.
32015-04-15 22:03:07 UTCGionUait Ok, I'll revert
12015-04-15 07:24:56 UTCwoodpeck I have reverted this changeset. Please do not modify Gibraltar territorial waters at this time; Data Working Group are looking into the situation and will recommend a solution.
12015-03-25 20:27:30 UTCemacsen While this information is true (most of the NE corridor tracks) allow for speeds about 120mph, not all do. I know because I was just on Acella a few days ago on this very route and sometimes we were going >100mph, and then in the middle of the journey, we dropped to ~30mph, around bends and popul...
22015-03-26 01:53:29 UTCemacsen Steve, you sent me an email, but I want to keep all conversations public. Please specify the source for where you say that these track ways are high speed compatible. Based on my experience, some are and some aren't.
32015-03-26 02:07:04 UTCemacsen In addition to Amtrak, you're also saying that some Metro-North rails are high speed. Please tell me where you can tell which rails are being replaced with high speed capable rails, because I haven't heard that they've completed that renovation universally. In other words. So what is your source?
42015-03-26 02:13:37 UTCstevea Hello Serge:

The "infrastructure on rail" tag of "highspeed=yes" is documented as widely used on the OpenRailwayMap (ORM) wiki here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenRailwayMap/Tagging#Tracks It says "Is this line a high-speed line (with permissible speeds greater...
52015-03-26 03:57:45 UTCemacsen Steve,

I'd request that you please stick to the discussion at hand, which is the issue of the track data.

I'd also ask that you please keep a civil tone and not use condescending language, such as telling someone to "relax".

To the substance of your email, as you say, the tag is f...
62015-03-26 05:54:24 UTCstevea Serge, the discussion at hand is: Amtrak says Acela uses the Northeast Corridor. Amtrak says Acela is highspeed. I have put 2 and 2 together and come up with 4: the tracks of the NEC are highspeed, because they support highspeed service, exactly as the tag is documented.

There are different t...
72015-03-26 17:20:59 UTCstevea Addressing Serge's specific request to "correct (my) tagging on...which track segments are high speed and which aren't," I continue to assert that ALL of the track segments of NEC are high speed. Again, this particular tag (highspeed=yes) is a correct answer to the semantic of the tag: &...
82015-04-01 04:47:33 UTCRussNelson Serge, Amtrak says that it's a high speed route, so ... it IS a high speed route. If you know how Amtrak signs the NEC speeds, you should tell the rest of us, because I don't know.
92015-04-01 10:04:16 UTCemacsen Russ, the issue is that individual tracks are tagged as high speed, not a single route. That indicates to me that the tracks must therefore be high speed capable, and many are not.
102015-04-01 19:23:17 UTCstevea Serge, individual tracks are tagged this way because that is how the tag is documented: it means the LINE of which this rail segment is a member is capable of supporting high speed route=train service. So, it is correct. (I repeat myself here, not a good sign).

Are there individual track segme...
112015-04-01 20:46:58 UTCemacsen Steve, if you want a route to have a specific tag, that's fine, use a relation and apply the tag to that route as a whole.

By tagging each way, you are saying "This track is high speed capable", which isn't true for some of these ways. I don't know which tracks are high speed capable an...
122015-04-01 21:01:17 UTCpnorman That Amtrak wants to upgrade the track makes it pretty clear to me that not all of it is high speed, and the limit on portions is not high speed. The UK is probably the best place to look for how this is tagged, as there's plenty of segments of track which are not high speed capable.

If there is ...
132015-04-01 21:13:41 UTCwoodpeck Wikipedia says that "Much of the [NEC] is built for speeds higher than the 79 mph (127 km/h) allowed on many U.S. tracks." - this implies that some of the NEC is not usable at high speed. I wonder how, in SteveA's understanding, these should be tagged? Surely it must be possible ...
142015-04-01 21:57:31 UTCstevea To Paul's comment: Amtrak's "upgrades" are intended to make an already-exists high speed line into an EVEN HIGHER speed line.

To Frederick's comments: a "more correct" way to capture that certain segments of rail have a limiting speed is with a maxspeed tag. I welcome these...
152015-04-02 09:06:54 UTCNakaner Up to now, there has not been reached any consensus among the railway mappers where to tag highspeed=yes and where not. There is one debate what the minimum speed should be (> 160 km/h, >= 160 km/h oder >= 200 km/h) or if there should be any world-wide minimum speed. For comparison, althoug...
162015-04-07 18:02:44 UTCstevea And there you have it from one of the authors (and a true rail expert from an OSM tagging perspective): "there has not been reached any consensus." What this says to me is that we have a bit of a tempest in a teapot here. Especially as other lines (in Europe, Asia) are tagged as I have ...
172015-04-07 18:12:33 UTCemacsen > signifying that track segment is part of a high speed line.

There's no evidence of that from what I read.

> To show my continuing good faith and hopefully to assuage the situation somewhat

Why don't you just do what everyone can agree is correct, and tag the route, rather than the i...
182015-04-07 18:29:29 UTCstevea The route (Acela Express, route=train) already is marked high speed, with the service=high_speed tag. This is precisely how ORM tagging instructions say it should be done. The tag is not applied (again, exactly as instructed) to the route=railway (NEC) relation. This is because ORM's tagging sect...
192015-04-07 18:40:27 UTCwoodpeck What is the practical use of a railway track marked highspeed=yes when this duplicates information from a relation? Is OpenRailwayMap unable to make the link between the relation and the track? -- Your maxspeed argument misses the point. If a road is tagged maxspeed=65 then I can legally go at 65 un...
202015-04-07 19:04:53 UTCstevea Yes, as Nakaner (and ORM tagging) document, ORM truly IS unable to "make the link between" (render) the relation, UNLESS the track is so tagged.

AGAIN, (I repeat) AS IT IS DOCUMENTED, the "highspeed=yes" tag literally means: "Is this line a high-speed line?" Emphas...
212015-04-07 19:12:07 UTCNakaner I suggest following temporary compromise between you as long as there has been no consensus about highspeed=yes found: highspeed=yes may only be tagged on those tracks which can be used with a speed greater than 100 mph (160 km/h). The usage of highspeed=yes on relations is not affected by this comp...
222015-04-07 19:14:58 UTCNakaner I think that argueing here a longer time will not lead us to a consensus. It will only cost valueable time of each of us. Please continue this debate either at ORM or Tagging mailing list. (Tagging is suitable in this case because it is not a topic where people have to have much knowledge about sign...
232015-04-08 02:43:10 UTCstevea It isn't too far a stretch to say NEC is "somewhere between orange and red." Subtle, huh, yeah, I know. As we best know how to tag.
242015-04-09 00:40:40 UTCstevea In changeset 30077144, I have deprecated the highspeed=yes tags from all NEC segments. However, previous changesets have set maxspeed= tags. As a net result, on segments where maxspeed>=160, highspeed=yes is "back" to being set. These segments include the great majority of the NEC, a...
252015-04-10 16:55:22 UTCstevea OpenRailwayMap's Infrastructure and Maxspeed styles now render these changes accurately. I consider this resolved.
12015-03-31 12:36:25 UTCwoodpeck Löschomat, Deine "Putzaktionen" stören den Frieden in OSM (http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=30613). Zwar sind Sammelrelationen in OSM tatsächlich nicht sinnvoll, aber in dieser großflächigen und aggressiven Weise sollte man nicht gegen sie vorgehen....
22015-04-01 12:18:02 UTCJojo4u löschomat löscht fröhlich weiter, 7 Changesets heute.
32015-04-02 07:29:29 UTCputz_ich Mir is bisher kein einziges inhaltlich zutreffendes Argument der ganzen Diskussion im Forum ersichtlich. Es handelt sich hier ausschliesslich um eine Aktion gegen einen bekannten Ignoranten von lang diskutierten und vereinbarten Regeln. Der Fall hat sich jetzt erledigt und Dank der schönen WIKI...
42015-04-02 07:59:43 UTCwoodpeck Leider ist nicht der Inhalt Deiner Löschungen das Problem, sondern die Form, die Du mit "Sorry... gehen leider nicht anders" nicht entschuldigen kannst.
12015-03-27 11:22:38 UTCwoodpeck You appear to be performing a data import. Has this import been discussed somewhere before it was started?
22015-03-27 15:03:57 UTCkwiecpav yes, see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue -- item LPIS (Ongoing Imports, Semi-Automated)
12015-03-22 20:54:17 UTCwoodpeck Is your Chinese good enough to make sure your reasoning is correct?
22015-03-22 21:20:19 UTCmueschel The street in China: simple comparison to the available name:en.
The street in Japan: google translator
All others seemed obvious.
12015-03-22 20:52:30 UTCwoodpeck This is a rather large changeset to be submitted without any comment at all. Care to explain what the changes were you committed here? I saw that you modified some TIGER roads but didn't delete the "tiger:revieved=no" tag. Why?
22015-03-22 22:03:56 UTCAmaryllisG Oh, I didn't know about that tag, my bad. I just usually "save" my changes occasionally, I guess I shouldn't let my changesets get this large, much less spanning multiple continents. I from now on will try to change that tag when I fix the alignment issues.
12015-03-22 20:49:13 UTCwoodpeck How did you check that?
22015-03-22 21:15:33 UTCmueschel On one way I just put a fixme, one is a roundabout, one is part of a short split lane on a junction and one already contained the oneway key. No guessing involved.
12015-03-22 20:47:36 UTCwoodpeck Since Level0 is not an editor that lets you visually check a concrete case, how did you determine which correction was the right one?
22015-03-22 21:13:15 UTCmueschel If the value is numeric, the correct key is lanes:psv, if it contains pipes and the usual access keywords, it has to be psv:lanes.
I checked the tagging of the ways for plausibility, but did not make a visual comparison to aerial images (which in case of bus lanes is rather impossible anyhow).
12015-03-10 02:28:47 UTCSomeoneElse You seem to have deleted "opening_hours:holydays" from http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3314274507/history , was that deliberate?
22015-03-10 08:32:34 UTCMKnight Yes. Have added "real" syntax to the opening_hours-key,

see: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours#Syntax for that
32015-03-10 10:32:53 UTCSomeoneElse Thanks, but how to capture the information that on holydays the opening hours are different?
42015-03-10 12:48:20 UTCMKnight the information is in the opening_hours-key
You can capture for SH or PH.

sry, my english is not the best, maybe i don't understand or misunderstand the question? There is no documented key "opening_hours:holidays"
52015-03-13 01:41:17 UTCSomeoneElse It doesn't matter whether there's a documented key (yet) or not - information is still useful to a human looking at the object and shouldn't have been deleted. You could argue that the tag should have been different, and perhaps it might have made sense to clarify with the original mapper what they...
62015-03-13 11:12:03 UTCMKnight I _don't_ have _deleted_ any information!
Don't understand your problem, will go now to the forum for help translating your messages and discussing about.
72015-03-13 11:47:28 UTCwoodpeck SomeoneElse, in the particular example you mentioned, the user has transferred data from the "holydays" tag into the opening_hours tag manually with no (apparent) loss of information?
82015-03-13 13:00:04 UTCmapper999 Have a look at the opening_hours syntax please. I don't think the current value covers what the original editor meant.
I think the correct syntax should be
Mo,Th 17:00-20:00; Tu,Fr 09:00-11:00,14:00-17:30; We 14:00-17:30; Sa 10:00-12:00; SH Mo,Tu,We,Fr off
You can use http://openingh.openstreetma...
92015-03-13 13:44:51 UTCMKnight Oha. Endlich ein Argument was ich verstehe...
Denkfehler meinerseits, bin davon ausgegangen, dass PH/SH off implizit wäre. Ich korrigier das changeset mal jetzt.

Allerdings: heisst das im Umkehrschluss auch, dass meiner Einschätzung nach gut die Hälfte aller opening_hours dahinge...
102015-03-13 13:45:27 UTCMKnight Ääh, der Thread im Forum ist hier: http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=30396
Diskutiert sich besser.
112015-03-13 20:19:48 UTCMKnight I have reverted most of the objects to the totally wrong version before.
12015-03-06 06:51:29 UTCwoodpeck This mechanical edit claims to correct for a problem with an ID preset, yet many of the objects being corrected are not contributed using ID but with "osmsync:dero" - maybe that needs fixing as well?
22015-03-06 06:55:05 UTCBryce C Nesbitt The first run of osmsync:dero had the problem also, it is now fixed.
32015-03-06 06:58:21 UTCBryce C Nesbitt There's a mix.

Here's an iD changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/29168107

The iD preset is still wrong.
42015-03-06 07:02:01 UTCBryce C Nesbitt It was my typo: "chaintool" vs. "chain_tool". Someone pointed it out just after the presets were finalized... so I'm fixing it now.
12015-03-06 06:42:03 UTCwoodpeck Hallo Swen, dieses Changeset ist ein "mechanischer Edit", in dem Du ohne Ansehen von Details einen Tag durch einen anderen ersetzt hast. Dass Du nicht genau hingeschaut hast, sieht man daran, dass Du auch solche Nodes "korrigiert" hast, bei denen das building-Tag eigentlich kompl...
22015-03-06 08:27:54 UTCSwen Wacker Ja, Du hast recht. das war falsch. Ich habe das eben in der Mailingliste gesehen und erkenne den Fehler. Revertierst Du den Edit?
12015-02-18 21:03:24 UTCwoodpeck This changeset adds houses with a large number of very specific tags, including the name of an occupant and the number of livestock owned. This is very unusual content for OSM. Can you provide details about the project - was there some kind of consultation with the OSM community or did someone exper...
22015-03-11 06:18:24 UTCNirab Pudasaini This is mapping work done by someone from Nepal Red Cross. This is not from census data , it looks like some kind of community survey done by Nepal Red Cross Society. This changeset has lots of useful information, but yes there are some tags that raise privacy concerns. It could a case of mapper not...
12015-02-14 20:39:37 UTCwoodpeck Achtung - der "Brandenburg-Viewer" ist aus Lizenzgründen keine erlaubte Quelle für OpenStreetMap. Änderungen, die auf dem Brandenburg-Viewer basieren, müssen zurückgenommen werden!
22015-02-15 03:25:36 UTCatpl_pilot Es erfolgen keine Änderungen durch den Brandenburg-Viewer, Der dient nur als Backup zur Verifizierung. Aber ich versuche mal das ganz noch einmal zu machen. Kann aber nicht versprechen, dass das noch heute Nacht passiert.
32015-02-15 08:10:50 UTCatpl_pilot Zu viele Konflikte, Auch Änderungen von Wambacher dabei. Lassen wir es dabei, Bis zur Klärung mit der Verwaltung wird dass nicht mehr passieren.
42015-02-15 20:44:58 UTCstreckenkundler Urheberrechtsinhaber und Genehmiger der Nutzungsrechte ist aber das Land Brandenburg, bzw. das LGB!!! Der Brandenburg-Viewer und seine Daten unterliegt NICHT der Geonutzungsverordnung des Bundes!!!
Meiner Meinung nach müssen alle Änderungen dringend zurückgenommen werden!!
12015-02-14 20:39:33 UTCwoodpeck Achtung - der "Brandenburg-Viewer" ist aus Lizenzgründen keine erlaubte Quelle für OpenStreetMap. Änderungen, die auf dem Brandenburg-Viewer basieren, müssen zurückgenommen werden!
22015-02-15 03:20:21 UTCatpl_pilot Wambacher hat schon Änderungen vorgenommen. Ansonsten hatte ich bereits zu einem anderen gleichlautenden Kommentar geantwortet.
12015-02-14 20:39:31 UTCwoodpeck Achtung - der "Brandenburg-Viewer" ist aus Lizenzgründen keine erlaubte Quelle für OpenStreetMap. Änderungen, die auf dem Brandenburg-Viewer basieren, müssen zurückgenommen werden!
12015-02-14 20:39:16 UTCwoodpeck Achtung - der "Brandenburg-Viewer" ist aus Lizenzgründen keine erlaubte Quelle für OpenStreetMap. Änderungen, die auf dem Brandenburg-Viewer basieren, müssen zurückgenommen werden!
22015-02-15 03:17:44 UTCatpl_pilot Laut Auskunft des Geodatenzentrums in Düsseldorf (ich hatte dort mit einer Mitarbeiterin vor einigen Monaten telefoniert), ist das Abmalen erlaubt, nicht jedoch der Datenimport. Ein Datenimport würde einen hohen 6stelligen Betrag kosten. Ich nutzte http://isk.geobasis-bb.de/strassennetz/ba...
32015-02-15 20:44:17 UTCstreckenkundler Urheberrechtsinhaber und Genehmiger der Nutzungsrechte ist aber das Land Brandenburg, bzw. das LGB!!! Der Brandenburg-Viewer und seine Daten unterliegt NICHT der Geonutzungsverordnung des Bundes!!!
Meiner Meinung nach müssen alle Änderungen dringend zurückgenommen werden!!
12015-02-02 09:48:59 UTCwoodpeck This appears to be an un-discussed and faulty import. The nodes have no tags and are not members of any ways. There is no mention of this import on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue. Buildings seem to have been cut off geometrically at the boundaries. Do not continue this building ...
12015-01-25 15:19:13 UTCwoodpeck Bitte erläutere umgehend, wieso Du in diesem und allen Deinen anderen Changesets bis heute ausschliesslich Edits des Benutzers "atpl_pilot" revertiert hast. Ein changeset-Kommentar von "fix" ist für diese Art von Edits nicht akzeptabel.
12015-01-21 12:28:41 UTCemacsen This changeset is a mass edit and that, as far as I can tell, has no other other purpose than mass reclassifying (downgrading) of roads for no reason.
22015-01-21 12:53:42 UTCwoodpeck SH17, what was the purpose of these edits? Are you working with a specific routing engine and getting undesirable results?
32015-01-28 21:23:28 UTCSH17 It doesn't make sense to have a primary designation end at a lower priority road. I'm just trying to fill in the gaps, if that makes sense. Full disclosure: this is one of my first edits on OSM, and I'm still trying to grasp the standards here. I'm sorry if I did something wrong, but it doesn't make...
42015-01-28 21:40:24 UTCemacsen SH17, there are really a few issues here, but before going into them, I want to be sure you understand that we're all just trying to make the best map, and I'm sure you are too.

OSM folks are pretty forgiving about new edits and not strict about standards, but what stood out to me about this edit...
12015-01-21 08:18:19 UTCwoodpeck reverted in 28301525 - un-discussed mechanical edit (and the same edit had been done and reverted before)
12015-01-14 11:29:06 UTCSomeoneElse How do you know that all of these roads marked as private are actually service roads?
22015-01-21 08:17:35 UTCwoodpeck reverted in 28301525 - un-discussed mechanical edit
12015-01-19 15:19:13 UTCwoodpeck What logic is behind these changes? What exactly is "fixed"? Why was, for example, way 282831734 changed from primary_link to residential when primary_link at least superficially seems to be the correct choice?
22015-01-20 21:30:10 UTCRub21 Hi woodpeck ,thanks for your feedback and sorry, that was error, I fixed that http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/28294122.

Thanks again for your feedback..
32015-01-20 22:44:36 UTCpnorman way 244211443 looks similarly odd - you've tagged it as a residential road joining two trunk roads.

Why did you add highway=residential to way 306099045?

Given the high level of errors, would it be easier to just revert this changeset?
42015-01-27 21:24:09 UTCpnorman Rub21, would it be better to revert this changeset?
52015-01-28 03:11:36 UTCRub21 Hi pnorman, I reverted my changes, http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/28456858, Thank you for the heads up
12015-01-16 14:35:55 UTCwoodpeck Hallo ThomasDDT, das Wort "ergänzt" steht im Deutschen meist dafür, etwas hinzuzufügen. Du hast relativ viele Changesets, in denen Du behauptest, etwas zu "ergänzen", in Wahrheit aber etwas löschst. Warum zum Beispiel wurden in diesem Changeset zwei Gr&uu...
12015-01-15 08:59:06 UTCwoodpeck It appears that you are shortening the names of many roads (Road to Rd, Street to St and so on). Is there any sort of community consensus in Burma about these kinds of edits? Because in other parts of the world - eg the USA - the community has decided to use the long names (automatic shortening is e...
12015-01-15 08:54:48 UTCwoodpeck You have been deleting a couple of buildings recently, like in this changeset, even though they are still visible on the Bing aerial imagery. You have not used a changeset comment to explain why these buildings have been deleted. Have they been destroyed? Please explain.
12015-01-12 19:21:06 UTCwoodpeck This reverts changeset 27867757.
22015-01-12 19:28:15 UTCgileri Doesn't a revert fall down under the MEP ? I have seen only one user referencing one subjective error on the changeset referenced, and no further discussion before revert. It seems ironic to say the least.
12015-01-10 21:09:19 UTCwoodpeck This is a rather large-scale mechanical edit. Has it been discussed before it was executed? Otherwise I'd ask you to please revert it and secure a community consensus before you run it again.
22015-01-10 23:38:59 UTCgileri Is there any problem regarding the data corrected by this changeset ? I am welcome to any suggestion or remark to better OSM data, if anyone have any.
32015-01-12 18:38:28 UTCyxoc Hello,

You have changed in Montrouge the contact:* keys of some shops in addr:*. This is a problem since the adresses are now duplicated (there are already adress nodes
for the buildings), as you can see easily on osmose. Had you looked into the history of these nodes you would have seen that I ...
42015-01-12 19:17:23 UTCgileri Ralf: If I get you right you mean you used an seemingly redundant, almost-unused tag, with only one reference in the wiki to input addresses which are already present on the surrounding building, in order to avoid errors on tools like osmose ?

The reason osmose didn't flag the way this feature ha...
52015-01-12 19:20:33 UTCwoodpeck Reverted in changeset 28095080. Any future similar edits must adhere to the existing mechanical edit policy.
62015-01-12 19:41:28 UTCgileri By reading the MEP wiki page, I'm not sure my edit falls under it. As stated on the "search-and-replace" section, changesets such as this one, as the data I modified is backed by the wiki, and the data on the features itselves.

So, as you deleted my work, may I ask you to tell me (wheth...
72015-01-12 20:03:19 UTCyxoc gileri: I am not sure either that the contact:* scheme is the best way to map multiple POI's under the same address, but it is the one which is recommended here in France. Anyway, there seems to be a consensus that duplicated addresses (with addr:* keys) wrong.

-Ralf.
12015-01-05 00:28:36 UTCwoodpeck This looks like an un-discussed import. I cannot find anything on the Wiki or the imports mailing list about it. Are you aware of http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines? Please explain.
22015-01-05 00:44:49 UTCzool Yes, it would be good to hear more.
32015-01-08 02:24:14 UTCJorge Meroglio Hi, I wasn't familiar with the import guidelines, sorry for that. It was just a little experiment, however it took so many days to improve the importing algorithm, It would be a mess to just kill the entire changeset because of few details. I think that the mistakes could be corrected easily, this i...
12015-01-03 16:00:40 UTCwoodpeck DWG has been contacted about the automated edits by Test360 and is reverting them. Thank you for dealing with the situation in your area already - but next time it would be great if you used the changeset discussion feature to actually express your criticism in the changeset that causes the problem ...
12015-01-02 16:46:51 UTCwoodpeck Please do not make any such mechanical/global edits without first discussing them in the appropriate place. See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edit_Policy for background.
12014-12-30 20:36:48 UTCwoodpeck Reverted in #27808967 by request of mapper
12014-12-28 21:09:53 UTCwoodpeck reverted http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27763601
12014-12-28 21:09:31 UTCwoodpeck reverted http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27763601
12014-12-27 17:06:17 UTCwoodpeck This changeset has been reverted. Please respect http://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes/DWG_2014-06-05_Special_Crimea
12014-12-18 20:13:19 UTCwoodpeck reverted: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27557692
12014-12-18 14:33:40 UTCaseerel4c26 Why do you think that here there are defibrillators at all four corners of the building? https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1954431108

By the way: your changeset "source" seems to be wrong.
22014-12-18 14:48:31 UTCaseerel4c26 Since you have inspected all objects manually, you did notice at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/462685385 that medical=aed was added by Carlos_Sánchez just two months ago in addition to emergency=defibrillator, right? Did you talk with this user? Essentially you have undid his addition. M...
32014-12-18 15:41:57 UTCpyrog > Why do you think that here there are defibrillators at all four corners of the building?
Ask to Carlos_Sánchez ?

> Maybe he has good reasons to add this tag
No, but probably he didn't know that medical=aed is deprecated ;-)

I will send him an email :-)

PS: when I check all ...
42014-12-18 17:42:07 UTCJonathan Bennett Who says medical=aed is deprecated? Do they have the authority to make that call?
52014-12-18 19:44:10 UTCSomeoneElse @pyrog https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27515219 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27522772 were reverted yesterday because you didn't discuss them first. I explained on the latter one one of the reasons why it's important that people know that changes are being made, so that they ...
62014-12-18 19:48:56 UTCSomeoneElse @pyrog also (in case aseerel4c26's comment above wasn't clear) look at the history of node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1954431108/history . You added the defibrillator at that node; it wasn't there before.
72014-12-18 20:02:47 UTCwoodpeck [Reverted.](http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27557520)
82014-12-18 20:42:03 UTCpyrog > Who says medical=aed is deprecated?
@ Jonathan Bennett ,
1. the wiki say exactly "Migration to the last approved version (emergency=defibrillator) is in progress"

2. There is only 9 objects tagged with medical=aed and only 10 with emergency=aed and "just" 8054 emergency...
12014-12-10 16:12:19 UTCwoodpeck You have accidentally classed the Philippine Continental Shelf EEZ as an "administrative boundary" leading to it showing on the map. This is undesirable and creates tension with other mappers in the region. I have changed it to a maritime boundary.
22014-12-11 03:53:17 UTCschadow1 this is noted. thanks
12014-11-17 03:03:34 UTCrickmastfan67 Itchy, I'm sorry, but I'm going to revert this changeset. The way we tag bridges is where they start/end. This bridge per imagery (MapBox is the only one showing the new bridge under-construction), it clearly shows it ends before the intersections on each side, not at them. That's how I put it a...
22014-11-18 21:07:48 UTCItchyDemon The bridge DOES start and end at the intersections. The problem with using satelite imagery is that it can become outdate very quickly, as is the case with MapBox: the imagery shows the bridge BEFORE completion, however the bridge has since been completed and now starts and ends at the intersections...
32014-11-18 21:13:37 UTCItchyDemon To add to my previous comment a bit of "proof" that mapbox is outdated: MapBox sti shows the *old* bridge prior to it being demolished, however the old bridge is literally not there (i.e. it has been completely removed, and no trace of it can be seen in the real world). The new bridge coul...
42014-11-19 02:58:11 UTCrickmastfan67 We don't tag the approach ramps as part of the bridge. It's obvious from the MapBox imagery and the image from the Post Gazette article ( http://bit.ly/1tWDLWT ), that the physical start of the bridge is well from the main intersection with Airbrake Avenue. In OSM, we consider the bridge to start ...
52014-11-19 02:58:43 UTCrickmastfan67 Also, if you look at the wiki bridge page, this line stands out for this case. "A ramp at an end of a bridge is not part of the bridge and can be tagged as embankment=*. An embankment should not have a layer tag in most cases." https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bridge?uselang=en-US ...
62014-11-19 03:37:40 UTCItchyDemon This is honestly the first time I've heard (read) of a "ramp" on a bridge. Even so, Your change seems to have the so-called "ramp" extend MUCH further than it really did: it should only be a foot or two and end almost immediately than extend much further than they were. Also, if ...
72014-11-19 04:50:47 UTCrickmastfan67 DUDE, the source you gave for your reversion PROVES my case completely.... http://triblive.com/neighborhoods/yourmckeesport/yourmckeesportmore/7153857-74/bridge-county-greensburg?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+alltribstories+%28TribLIVE+News%29#axzz3JTQs5O9t
82014-11-19 05:02:32 UTCrickmastfan67 Where the concrete color changes, that's the true start of the bridge.
92014-11-19 05:11:43 UTCrickmastfan67 Plus there's grass on each side there, clearly proving it's 'ground level' and not part of the bridge.
102014-11-19 07:58:34 UTCwoodpeck I am writing in my capacity as a member of OpenStreetMap's Data Working Group. Please everybody calm down. It is indeed usual in OSM to not let a bridge terminate at junctions (see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bridge#How_to_map), and while in engineering/construction terms the bridge might per...
woodpeck has contributed to 293 changeset discussions(s) with a total of 879 comment(s)