| Changeset | # | ⏱️ Last updated | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 139249463 by Adamant1 @ 2023-07-31 11:23 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | spughetti ♦121 | Reverted due to low qualityhttps://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/142628128 |
| 84166445 by Adamant1 @ 2020-04-27 03:35 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | Mateusz Konieczny ♦9,513 | https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6787400863/history - how you know that it was a car repair location? |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | Adamant1 | The edit was made three years ago, which is way to long ago for me to remember now. I'm sure there was a reason though since I don't usually make random edits that I haven't researched somehow ahead of time. | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | Adamant1 | What exactly is your issue with how I tagged it or evidence that it's tagged wrong? | |
| 4 | ~ 3 years ago | Adamant1 | Like the untrained remote HOT youth mappers who added this stuff totally ground surveyed everything and knew the correct tags to use. "Eye roll." | |
| 5 | ~ 3 years ago | Mateusz Konieczny ♦9,513 | I am considering complete or partial revert of initial edits - so I am wondering how you managed to interpret what they added.If it is possible then I would use the same method to handle other `name=local shop` objects | |
| 6 | ~ 3 years ago | Adamant1 | It's a little ridiculous to revert an edit from 3 years ago just because some can't remember the exact reason they made it at the time though. I'm sure that can go for most edits on here. More so in this case because you have evidence that how I tagged it is wrong or that I didn'... | |
| 7 | ~ 3 years ago | Adamant1 | Other then that I'm not really sure what your referring to with the `name=local shop` thing. As far as I know there isn't any places with name=local_shop that are either a part of this edit or that I've edited. If you want to changesets to what your talking about I can take a look at... | |
| 8 | ~ 3 years ago | Adamant1 | *you have zero evidence that how I tagged it is wrong | |
| 9 | ~ 3 years ago | Mateusz Konieczny ♦9,513 | I am not planning to revert your edit at all - I am considering reverting part or all of original edit adding this POIs as many of them make no sense at all.Or at least part of them, specifically names which in large part were set to name=local shop which is definitely wrongI am not claiming... | |
| 10 | ~ 3 years ago | Adamant1 | Oh OK. That makes more sense. If it wasn't from three years ago I'd probably have an answer for you about why I tagged them the way I did. I can't really remember at this point. I agree that a lot of them nonsensical though. So reverting most or all of the originals would probably be ... | |
| 11 | ~ 3 years ago | Mateusz Konieczny ♦9,513 | And I know that there is decent chance of not remembering what is going on - sometimes I also respond "dunno, no idea why I tagged it this way"but sometimes people are able to respond even about truly ancient ones | |
| 12 | ~ 3 years ago | Adamant1 | I appreciate that and you asking me my opinion before you reverted the edits. I just miss-understood what you were asking and why you were asking it. No worries though.BTW, congratulations on becoming a trademark licensing subcommittee representative. I know that's an area you've done ... | |
| 127661559 by Adamant1 @ 2022-10-17 09:59 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | oba510 ♦273 | Hi, do you know anything more about this place? Dubbelju closed and was replaced by a rocket engine company, but that company didn't stick around for very long and this location is filled with motorcycles again. The signage for Dubbelju is still up alongside the signs for a motorcycle repair b... |
| 126927595 by Adamant1 @ 2022-10-03 10:00 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | VLD165 ♦7 | “Hello Adamant1, Your actions in changeset #126927595 removed several relations. I will be reverting this changeset. Feels free to modify the imagery of badly mapped areas without deletions in the future. Thanks” |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | Adamant1 | I removed the relations because they were inaccurately mapped and don't match what's on the ground. People are allowed to delete things in such instances. It's impossible to just modify the areas in this case because of nature of the water and the fact that the area had hundreds of mi... | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | Adamant1 | *nature of the river | |
| 4 | ~ 3 years ago | VLD165 ♦7 | Hi Adamant1,Perhaps there are other fixes we could explore, like adding seasonal/intermittent tags to several parts of Smith River. Do you have specific coordinates supported by ground truth where the seasonal/intermittent tags can be added? | |
| 5 | ~ 3 years ago | Adamant1 | Adding seasonal/intermittent tags to it wouldn't be adequate because the area would still be grossly inaccurate even if it was tagged as intermittent. You can't have a water body that goes over parts of a forest when that's clearly not where the water course goes for instance and j... | |
| 6 | ~ 3 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | @VLD165 Looking at the area around https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1022949816/history : The water area is an nmixter import (on which any QA was likely very limited or non-exis... | |
| 122918082 by Adamant1 @ 2022-06-27 16:27 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | Joseph E ♦137 | It is inappropriate to map this entire area (most of the Marble Mountain Wilderness) as woodland, while much of it is wooded, there are large ares of bare rock, scrub, grass and many lakes. Please remove this, and map smaller areas which actually correspond to the areas of trees only. |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | Adamant1 | "It is inappropriate to map this entire area (most of the Marble Mountain Wilderness) as woodland, while much of it is wooded." Unfortunately it's impossible to map each individual wooded spots as separate areas. Whereas, mapping the rocky areas inside the wood does work perfectly... | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | Adamant1 | Especially consider how much of this area has been burned through the last couple of years. At this point it would probably be just as accurate to map it all as grassland. | |
| 93680909 by Adamant1 @ 2020-11-06 19:00 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | lyctkel ♦357 | Hi Adamant1,did you mean building=house at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/775933157?Regards,lyctkel |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | Adamant1 | Yes I did. Thanks for pointing out the error. | |
| 110943895 by Adamant1 @ 2021-09-09 02:49 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | trigpoint ♦2,595 | Hi, this is not a charity shop, why did you change it?Cheers Phil |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | Adamant1 | Five months ago is a pretty long time to remember. Although I do research on things before I changed them. So I'm sure there was a reason. That said, originally it was tagged as shop=thrift. Both that and shop=charity make a lot more sense then shop=recycle. Whatever nonsense that is. I don... | |
| 3 | ~ 4 years ago | Adamant1 | So I looked at their Facebook/Website and they sound like a charity shop. Especially going by the definition given for one on the Wiki. So what's your specific with it being tagged as one, how does your disagreement related to the definition in the Wiki article, and how is that my issue when I&... | |
| 4 | ~ 4 years ago | Adamant1 | For that matter shop=art would be 100 times more descriptive then shop=recycle if you just have something in your craw about shop=charity for some reason. Personally, I could go with either shop=charity or shop=art. | |
| 116867062 by Adamant1 @ 2022-02-01 12:40 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | willkmis ♦197 | I posted my comment in the other changeset coming from a place of assuming good faith, in the hopes of convincing you of my (and a broad consensus of mappers') opinion. However, calling those who legitimately disagree with you on a tagging matter vandals and trolls is no way to go about a respe... |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | Adamant1 | Me and btwhite92 had agreed in the other discussion that the roads would be demoted until the discussion was settled. ZeLonewolf then came along, attacked me without otherwise being involved in the discussion, and re-tagged the roads against the agreement that me and btwhite92 had about it. Which to... | |
| 3 | ~ 4 years ago | EP_Repair ♦563 | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 116887684 where the changeset comment is: Reverting edit-war edit that was neither vandalism nor posted by a troll account. | |
| 111750213 by Adamant1 @ 2021-09-27 06:13 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | Joseph E ♦137 | Re: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/987279498 and adjacent short highway=track features - are you sure these are roads? They don’t look much different from the other rows of trees. See e.g. ESRI World Imagery Clarity (Beta) here https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?way=987279498#map=19/39.1281... |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | Adamant1 | As far as I know Bin aerial imagery is the most up to date. If you use that and take away the OpenStreetMap data layer it's pretty clear there are paths between the rows of trees. You could debate if they are just paths or track roads, but it would make sense that there would be track roads for... | |
| 107773656 by Adamant1 @ 2021-07-11 09:16 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | skquinn ♦810 | Great work! |
| 86393687 by Adamant1 @ 2020-06-09 08:16 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | To me this looks like it is _not_ a clothes shop, but a bike shop selling bike and ATV bits, with clothes as a bit of an afterthought. |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | I'd be just as fine with shop=motorcycle_parts with a clothes=yes or clothes=motorcycle tag then. The important thing is that it doesn't sell motorcycles. So it shouldn't be tagged like it does just because it has stuff related to them. | |
| 86865022 by Adamant1 @ 2020-06-19 08:41 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | To be fair, https://www.polo-motorrad.com/de-de/stores/polo-motorrad-store-kriftel/ suggests a typical "destination bike shop" to me, a bit like one a couple of miles from where I used to live. Heavy on the clothes, sure, but looks more "motorbike" than "clothes". |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | The description on their website says "Discover our large selection of motorcycle helmets of various brands, leather clothing and functional textile clothing as well as motorcycle luggage, technical articles and motorcycle accessories." None of those things looks more like "motorb... | |
| 87520880 by Adamant1 @ 2020-07-04 01:57 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | dieterdreist ♦887 | strange, another town where you removed an amenity=hospice tag? There is no reason to remove it, you did not set a different amenity tag. I believe this is part of a disguised undiscussed edit. |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Oh goody, are we back to the false accusations of "disguised undiscussed edits" again? This is a part of the same exact supposedly "disguised" edits you and SomeoneElse accused me of before that you never provided any evidence for, that went know where, Woodpeck said I didn'... | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | PT-53 ♦3,642 | Hallo Adamant1,aus der History ergibt sich eindeutig, daß Du das Merkmalamenity=hospicegelöscht und dafür das Merkmalhealthcare=hospiceeingetragen hast.Bei uns ist es üblich beide Merkmale zu verwenden! Bitte beachte dies und nimm Deine Löschung zurück.G... | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Sorry, but I don't speak German, Dutch, or whatever language that is. | |
| 5 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Never mind. I used Google translate. I disagree that it costumery to use two tags for the exact same thing on a POI. The Wiki says as much and I've had multiple conversations where people have told me so. Especially in cases where "newer", more widely accepted tags come along and mor... | |
| 6 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | That said, as I've said already, just now and six months ago when this originally came up, people are free to this however they want and I could really give a crap how it's tagged. I'm not "withdrawing my deletion" though. Whatever that means. Just because people like you an... | |
| 7 | ~ 5 years ago | dieterdreist ♦887 | Adamant, I take back the "disguised", and I beg your pardon for having forgotten that we have already talked about it. Still, there clearly is an issue, you are remotely editing stuff in an area which you do not know, removing tags that locals have set, without giving a clear reason. Which... | |
| 8 | ~ 5 years ago | dieterdreist ♦887 | Btw: the tag has almost zero uses because you and others have removed them in the past months. By the time you removed it, there were still much more than there are now. You are right that we could just add the tag back, but we are having this discussion here because you are a very active mapper a... | |
| 9 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | People remotely change and remove tags all the time. Almost every edit in OSM is exactly that. It's only an issue in this case because your making it one. In this case, as I already told you on the Wiki, which you've seemed to ignore for whatever reason, I looked around the website and... | |
| 10 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | "Something that was already resolved. | |
| 11 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | "Your not raising awareness about anything | |
| 12 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Also, if you want to go with the nativist "only tag where you live" crap, cool. You, Polar Bearing, SomeoneElse, Woodpeck, and all the other European mappers that keep mapping around America and telling us America's how to map things, usually rather condescendingly I might add, can st... | |
| 13 | ~ 5 years ago | dieterdreist ♦887 | I do not say: only map where you are on the ground, although I believe it is the best. I say do not remove tags from objects, without further discussion with the local community, in places which you do not know and where you do not know the community. Adding things from aerial imagery bears some ris... | |
| 14 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Cool if that's your standard. That doesn't mean it's anyone else's standard or that there's anything with not doing it "your" way. As I said, plenty of people tag things based what they read about a business it's website. For instance, I highly doubt the vast ... | |
| 15 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | BTW, it should obvious that the "one the ground rule" means things have to ground verifiable. Not that "on the ground" is the only way people can add or edit things. | |
| 16 | ~ 5 years ago | dieterdreist ♦887 | See, you write"People remotely change and remove tags all the time. Almost every edit in OSM is exactly that. It's only an issue in this case because your making it one.In this case, as I already told you on the Wiki, which you've seemed to ignore for whatever reason, I looked a... | |
| 17 | ~ 5 years ago | dieterdreist ♦887 | the "ground" does not tell you whether amenity or healthcare is more appropriate, and whether one of them must be removed or both could be kept (why not?). Being on the ground means you know the general setting, what is customary, the local culture, language etc., requirements to really pa... | |
| 18 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Since when does every single edit someone makes need to be discussed before they make it? You people act like anything that doesn't involve a ton of graveling to a mailing list before hand isn't valid. No matter how biennial the edit is. Yet, most of the time none of you "things shoul... | |
| 19 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Especially because pretty much every disagreement can be resolved without needing to take it to that level. | |
| 20 | ~ 5 years ago | dieterdreist ♦887 | "Since when does every single edit someone makes need to be discussed before they make it?" - while it would be nice when you actually __remove__ what others have bothered to add, it is not strictly a requirement, I agree. When you actually go out and do several of these removals in differ... | |
| 21 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | The problem with the witch hunting way of doing this is that you treat people like they are doing something wrong or against the guidelines. Not in a way that doesn't fit your personal preference of what would be "nice" to do. There's plenty of things I think it would be "ni... | |
| 87481796 by Adamant1 @ 2020-07-03 05:37 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | dieterdreist ♦887 | strange, another town where you removed an amenity=hospice tag? There is no reason to remove it, you did not set a different amenity tag. I believe this is part of a disguised undiscussed edit. |
| 87520980 by Adamant1 @ 2020-07-04 02:10 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | dieterdreist ♦887 | strange, another town where you removed an amenity=hospice tag? There is no reason to remove it, you did not set a different amenity tag. I believe this is part of a disguised undiscussed edit. |
| 87520870 by Adamant1 @ 2020-07-04 01:56 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | dieterdreist ♦887 | Hi, I noticed you removed the amenity=hospice tag. Can you explain the reasoning? |
| 87449033 by Adamant1 @ 2020-07-02 10:57 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | Hello Adamant1,I'm aware that you're involved in an edit-war (wiki and OSM data) with ti-lo and the actions of the other party have been extremely problematic (see e.g. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features/motorcycle_friendly&oldid=1631121#Staged_voting ... |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Andy, the last time I checked the point in a shop tag is to tell that a place sells whatever the tag says it does. So motorcycle:sales is completely unnecessary and redundant. As far as the other tags goes, I believe (and I think other people do also. I seem to remember there being a discussion abo... | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | In the meantime, there's zero legitimate reason to use a tag like motorcycle:sales=yes on something already tagged as shop=motorcycle. | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | Perhaps it would help to take a step back and ask yourself why you find yourself involved in edit wars so much in OSM - both in the OSM Data and in the wiki? This doesn't happen to most people.All of us have different goals - different sets of things that we want to map. Working together th... | |
| 5 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Andy, I find it rather bizarre that most times I see a report opened on here it turns into a personal thing about the person who filed the report. Doing so never actually deals with the issues, is just victim blaming, and causes these kinds of petty (on the original persons side) to continue. It als... | |
| 6 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | On this particular issue, and I think it applies to the other ones also, the wiki is pretty clear in the article about namespaces that Over-namespacing should be avoided. Two things it says applies here and in the other instances also IMO. Particularly points two and three of the article. Which ... | |
| 7 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | I've done a ton of research on a lot of the POIs I've edited, I always do, and I can guarantee from that research that a lot of the ones RTFM is modify are correct how me and other users had them. I guess I should ignore that though and let RTFM change all my edits to how he wants them bec... | |
| 8 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | > I have had a few problems here and there, but everyone does. No - they don't, honest. | |
| 9 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Oh yeah, and lets add to that a member of the DWG telling me awhile back we should use more specific shop tags when we can. So, me using a general shop was a problem and now me using a more specific one when I was told to by someone from the DWG is also a problem and your maligning me for having pro... | |
| 10 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | >No - they don't, honest.Really? I just pointed out examples of people who do. Especially with RTFM. Jeisenbe routinely has issues with people on the wiki for reverting people. I won't even go into the many problems there's been with Woodpeck and his bad attitude. or I guess th... | |
| 11 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | I don't expect you to treat the platform like it's a cesspool, even though it really is, but you should at least have enough respect for users to be honest about the general level of disfunction and not use some crap like "everyone except you gets along and your the only that has prob... | |
| 12 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Back to the actual issue. Here's an edit made my Ti-lo three days to a place I had tagged as shop=motorcycle_parts called "Germany Motorsports - Motorcycle accessories and motorcycle clothing"https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/97161716#map=19/48.27626/9.47769With the change... | |
| 13 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | BTW, Andy. If you'll notice in my changeset before Ti-Lo's I said in my changeset comment "Changed tags per discussion." You want to know why? Because I had talked about how to tag the place properly with the person who originally created the POI and we both agreed that shop=... | |
| 96471426 by Adamant1 @ 2020-12-27 03:24 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | Arane Labs ♦2 | Hi Adamant, has the source of these buildings changed? |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Yeah. To me and the satellite images that I used to readjust them with to the proper areas. Which is reflected in the changeset. | |
| 90640093 by Adamant1 @ 2020-09-09 10:51 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | naveenpf ♦714 | Welcome to OSM Kerala.https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Kerala/MembersTo join OSM Kerala Telegram click on. https://t.me/osmkerala --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/90640093 |
| 84036286 by Adamant1 @ 2020-04-24 05:11 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | Hello,This looks like a one-by-one mechanical edit of notice boards with a misleading changeset comment of "Improved tagging". Can you explain where it was discussed with the community?Best Regards,Andy |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | I didn't know it was "miss-leading" to leave badly written, vague changeset comments. At least not the point of someone making a bunch of false accusations about me. Lessons learned I guess. I'm surprised as a DWG that you don't have better tools then how they phrase a chang... | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | Can you explain what you're trying to say in the "I didn't know..." paragraph? It's really not clear from what you've written.For the avoidance of doubt, it is definitely misleading "to leave badly written, vague changeset comments" (and that's somethi... | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | It's not miss-leading in the way that your using the term, because I didn't use the changeset comment as way to lead people down a different path for the purpose of deception. So in that respect, it was not "miss-leading. I don't know what other way you might be using it which wo... | |
| 5 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | BTW, setting aside the changeset comment, looking at the wiki I guess "board" is listed as a possible synonym of board_type= (although apparently I added it as one. which I really don't remember doing, but I still think it's valid). Either way though and whatever the wiki says, t... | |
| 87520973 by Adamant1 @ 2020-07-04 02:09 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | HelloIn what way is this "Improved tags"? It looks like a stealth mechanical edit to me. Can you explain where it was discussed with the community?Best Regards,Andy |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Hello. As Woodpeck just pointed out in the Wiki "NB Dieterdreist's accusation is not correct, only 13 of ~ 200 social_facility=hospice have been last edited by Adamant1." Can you point out where it says anywhere that I need to discuss making 13 edits before hand or how exactly that wo... | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Also, please stop spamming my changesets with comments. | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Maybe work out one and then go onto the next, but it's not helpful to resolving anything if my email keeps popping up alerts and I have to deal with a bunch of your messages at once. | |
| 5 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | For the avoidance of doubt I originally surveyed this and my original tagging was valid. Have you been in Clay Cross recently? | |
| 6 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | Re "Also, please stop spamming my changesets with comments" perhaps you will be dissuaded from doing stealth mechanical edits in the future? | |
| 7 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | No I won't, because that wasn't what I was doing and if your going to make accusations that I was you should provide a little more evidence then me accidentally writing something wrong in a changeset comment. | |
| 8 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Especially one from two months that I don't even remember at this point. | |
| 9 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | Hello again,If this wasn't a stealth mechanical edit then what actually was it? What was it that caused you to suddenly take an interest in hospices in the East Midlands of England or notice boards in York? If you think that tags for a certain class of feature should be changed from X to Y ... | |
| 10 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | I take interest in a lot of things. It gets pretty repetitive mapping the same old crap in my little town of 10,000 people over and over. I'm not sure what the crime there is or why it's a problem. In this particular instance there was an extremely small amount of instances of amenity=hos... | |
| 11 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | BTW, I've also always thought that if someone wants an extremely detailed analysis of my edits they can just look at my edit history. Since that's what it is there for. I know that doesn't work for people using QA tools, but that's where the presumption of good faith comes in. I ... | |
| 87490131 by Adamant1 @ 2020-07-03 08:11 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | dieterdreist ♦887 | this is supposedly part of an undiscussed concealed automated edit which retagged several amenity=hospice |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Weird, because no one ever messaged me about it. They were free to if there was a problem with any of them. Usually it's obligatory to contact someone before reverting them. So, I'm a little disappointed and irritated about it. Also, I did all those edits by hand over the course of a f... | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Were you the one that did the revert and was it discussed anywhere? I assume were since you know about it and are commenting on my changesets. Plus, we just got in that little tiff about similar things in the name-index. So, this seems a tad like petty backhanded pay back on your part. | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | dieterdreist ♦887 | I did not revert any of this as I am not at the desk currently. This is neither a payback for any other discussion we have had. I just noticed that usage of the tag went down and that of social facility went up, I looked at random objects and saw it was you making this globally. | |
| 5 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | For info I changed 3 hospices in the east mids of England (that I originally surveyed on the ground) back to their original tagging - I don't know if that's the "revert" being talked about? | |
| 87491954 by Adamant1 @ 2020-07-03 08:43 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | For info, I've reverted this to the previous tagging that was as a result of survey. |
| 87520988 by Adamant1 @ 2020-07-04 02:11 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | Hello,This looks like a one-by-one mechanical edit of hospices with a misleading changeset comment of "Improved tagging". Can you explain where it was discussed with the community? It was my previous survey, so I've changed it back.Best Regards,Andy |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | For info, I've reverted this to the previous tagging that was as a result of survey. | |
| 84036440 by Adamant1 @ 2020-04-24 05:14 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | Hello,This looks like a one-by-one mechanical edit of notice boards with a misleading changeset comment of "Improved tagging". Can you explain where it was discussed with the community?Best Regards,Andy |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Can you please stop spamming my changesets with the same message over and over? It's not really helpful. I responded on the first one. That should be enough for now. | |
| 84037024 by Adamant1 @ 2020-04-24 05:24 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | Hello,This looks like a one-by-one mechanical edit of notice boards with a misleading changeset comment of "Improved tagging". Can you explain where it was discussed with the community?Best Regards,Andy |
| 84036258 by Adamant1 @ 2020-04-24 05:10 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | Hello,This looks like a one-by-one mechanical edit of notice boards with a misleading changeset comment of "Improved tagging". Can you explain where it was discussed with the community?Best Regards,Andy |
| 84036230 by Adamant1 @ 2020-04-24 05:09 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | Hello,This looks like a one-by-one mechanical edit of notice boards with a misleading changeset comment of "Improved tagging". Can you explain where it was discussed with the community?Best Regards,Andy |
| 84037002 by Adamant1 @ 2020-04-24 05:24 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | Hello,This looks like a one-by-one mechanical edit of notice boards with a misleading changeset comment of "Added power pole". Can you explain where it was discussed with the community?Best Regards,Andy |
| 84036973 by Adamant1 @ 2020-04-24 05:23 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | Hello,This looks like a one-by-one mechanical edit of notice boards with a misleading changeset comment of "Added power pole". Can you explain where it was discussed with the community?Best Regards,Andy |
| 87490238 by Adamant1 @ 2020-07-03 08:13 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | dieterdreist ♦887 | this is supposedly part of an undiscussed concealed automated edit which retagged several amenity=hospice |
| 87490565 by Adamant1 @ 2020-07-03 08:19 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | dieterdreist ♦887 | this is supposedly part of an undiscussed concealed automated edit which retagged several amenity=hospice |
| 87490634 by Adamant1 @ 2020-07-03 08:20 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | dieterdreist ♦887 | this is supposedly part of an undiscussed concealed automated edit which retagged several amenity=hospice |
| 87481753 by Adamant1 @ 2020-07-03 05:36 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | Cascafico ♦578 | ho provato a vedere il sito , ma non ho capito se è una casa di riposo (amenity=nursing_home) oppure un ostello per malati terminali (healthcare=hospice) --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/87481753 |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | I couldn't tell myself, but it was already tagged as hospice and going by the size of the place I think hospice is a good bet. | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | That said, I'm fine with either tag. I don't think there is that much of a difference with these particular things. | |
| 86745746 by Adamant1 @ 2020-06-17 02:09 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | DoctorSpeck ♦53 | Can you check the tags on the way enclosing the property?It's tagged as building=yes where it should probably be landuse=commercialhttps://www.openstreetmap.org/way/816706791 --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/86745746 ... |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I chalk it up to iD Editor automatically adding the building tag when it shouldn't have. Although, it's on me for failing to catch it. I'm never sure if things like this should be landuse=commercial or landuse=garages. Whatever the case, it'... | |
| 86393792 by Adamant1 @ 2020-06-09 08:18 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | PT-53 ♦3,642 | Hallo Adamant1,wie kommst Du darauf, daß dieses Geschäfthttps://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1486401274/historyMotorradkleidung anbietet?Auf der Homepage kann ich nichts dazu finden!Fragende Grüße |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Hello. You know, I didn't either, but it was tagged as containing clothes before I edited it and so I figured it was something particular to this location that isn't reflected on their web page. A lot of times stores that sell motorcycle clothes and parts, but not motorcycles will be mainl... | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | PT-53 ♦3,642 | Hallo,ich finde es nicht richtig, Änderungen ohne vorherige Überprüfung, also nur auf Verdacht hin vorzunehmen. Das könnte man auch als verpönten mechanischen Edit ansehen!Änderst Du Deine falsche Änderung noch?Grüße | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Respectfully, I have to disagree. It was tagged as motorcycle:clothes=yes prior to my edit. So, thinking that the place sells clothes just because it's not on their website wasn't "only on suspicion." There should always be a presumption of good faith that the prior editor knew w... | |
| 5 | ~ 5 years ago | PT-53 ♦3,642 | Hallo Adamant1, berichtigst Du Deine falsche Änderung noch?Fragende Grüße | |
| 6 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Sorry, but I don't know what wrong change your referring to. I told you it was already tagged as a place that doesn't sell motorcycles and sells clothing before I tagged it as a clothing store and like I said, I rather assume the person who tagged it as a place that sells clothes knew what... | |
| 7 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | It looks like the motorcycle:clothes=yes tag was originally added by ti-lo. Since he lives in Germany and rides motorcycles I'm assuming he's correct that the place sells clothes instead of motorcycles and didn't just tag it that way randomly. | |
| 8 | ~ 5 years ago | PT-53 ♦3,642 | Auf der Homepagehttps://www.germany-motorsports.com/steht nichts, aber auch gar nichts von Motorradkleidung! Da werden Motorradteile verkauft.Wenn Du etwas änderst, dann bitte richtig. So ist das - gem. Homepage - genauso falsch wie vorher. | |
| 9 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | I agree with you it's not on the website that they sell clothes. But I'm telling you that I'm not the person that tagged it that way and the person that did lives in Germany and rides motorcycles. So he probably had a reason for doing it. I'm not what you don't get about tha... | |
| 10 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | So take it up with him dude. | |
| 11 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | It's not on me that someone else screwed up the tagging. | |
| 12 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | I'm going to assume good faith that he didn't though. If your not willing to, that's on you. Don't blame me because your not willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that the place sells clothes though. | |
| 13 | ~ 5 years ago | PT-53 ♦3,642 | Du hast eine Änderung vorgenommen, ohne diese vorher zu überprüfen. Dann wäre es auch Deine Aufgabe mit ti-lo Kontakt aufzunehmen. | |
| 14 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Go argue with him about it. | |
| 15 | ~ 5 years ago | PT-53 ♦3,642 | Vielleicht wird dort auch Motorradkleidung verkauft, aber hauptsächlich wohl Motorradteile! Diese Info fehlt jetzt! | |
| 16 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Would you be satisfied with shop=motorcycle_parts? Because I agree that it shouldn't be tagged as a clothing store if they don't sell clothes,but for the same reasons it shouldn't be tagged as shop=motorcycle if they don't sell motorcycles. And shop=motorcycle_parts is the only a... | |
| 17 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | BTW, the information that they sell parts isn't missing. Since I tagged it with parts=motorsports. It doesn't sound or look like from their from website that the parts they sell are exclusively for motorcycles. They all look rather generic from the pictures. | |
| 18 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Also, there's a page on their website that lists clothes. Although it's currently empty, but that's probably where ti-lo got it from. I guess that's the problem with trying to tag store inventory with namespace tags. https://www.germany-motorsports.com/technik/sale/bekleidung | |
| 19 | ~ 5 years ago | PT-53 ♦3,642 | Dann wäre dochshop=motorcycle_partspassender. | |
| 20 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | I think shop=motorcycle_parts would probably be the best tag. I'm OK with it if you are. | |
| 21 | ~ 5 years ago | PT-53 ♦3,642 | Dann mach das. | |
| 22 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | IMO it wouldn't be on me to ask the last person who made the change about it in this case anymore then it would be for someone to when doing a basic tag upgrade in iD Editor. If that were the standard nothing would ever updated and it would be the same map there was 10 years ago. It is on you t... | |
| 23 | ~ 5 years ago | PT-53 ♦3,642 | Die letzte Person, die etwas geändert hat, warst Du! | |
| 24 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | It's dealt with. Let it go! | |
| 86377836 by Adamant1 @ 2020-06-09 02:46 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | Timur_Crimea ♦22 | Please, Stop your vandalism!Read https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Amotorcycle%3Aparts CAREFULLY!"motorcycle:parts=yes/noUseful combination:shop=motorcycle""shop \tmotorcycle_parts"tag does not exist! |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Re "shop=motorcycle_parts doesn't exist", it has 76 uses. So, your simply wrong there. As far as motorcycle:parts=yes/no goes, I have zero problem with it being used as a tag to describe a service some other type of shop provides, but there's zero reason to use it in a miss-leadi... | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | BTW, If your going to revert someone at least have the integrity to wait until the discussion you started about it to finish before you do. Otherwise, It just leads to edit warring or the person who did the revert getting pie in their face when it turns out they are wrong. While I'm fine wi... | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | mavl ♦76,555 | Hello Adamant1. Please, don't continue the edit wars. If you think that tag "shop=motorcycle_parts" is good then add this tag for new objects. Don't change existent objects. Local mappers will use "shop=motorcycle_parts" if they will want. Vladimir Marshinin D... | |
| 5 | ~ 5 years ago | mavl ♦76,555 | Timur_Crimea, вы можете вернуть вашу версию, если нужно. Timur_Crimea, you can use your version if it is necessary. Vladimir Marshinin Data Working Group | |
| 6 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | mavl, Timur_Crimea never responded after I explained the edit. So I thought they were cool with it. That's not edit warring and I don't appreciate the accusation that it was. Also, people improve tags all over the place all the time and upgrading tags to more descriptive ones is suppor... | |
| 7 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | BTW, mavl one of the reasons I am doing this is because I was specifically told by an admin a while back that if we can use more specific shop tags on things to do it. Instead of using less descriptive one just so it renders. Which is probably why it was tagged as shop=motorcycle here. If I'm g... | |
| 8 | ~ 5 years ago | mavl ♦76,555 | @Adamant1, the tag "shop=motorcycle" is not an error. There is no reason to delete it. | |
| 9 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Where did I say the shop=motorcycle tag was an "error"? I've said from the start of this that shop=motorcycle_parts is a more descriptive shop tag. That's it. Just like amenity=car_rental is a more descriptive tag then shop=rental, etc, etc, etc. In no way does that imply shop=re... | |
| 10 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | "over-namespacing leads to a disseminated data scheme: for example, someone interested in VHF channels data will have to look for harbour:VHF_channel key, plus seamark:habour:VHF_channel, plus VHF_channel, plus lock:VHF_channel, plus vhf to collect the data... Using only the vhf key should be e... | |
| 11 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | So in other words, this is forcing people to search for shop=motorcycle + motorcycle:sales=no + motorcycle:parts=yes + shop=motorcycle_parts. Instead of just shop=motorcycle_parts. Just so there is an icon. | |
| 12 | ~ 5 years ago | mavl ♦76,555 | @Adamant1 You may use "shop=motorcycle_parts" tag. Timur_Crimea may use "shop=motorcycle" tag. "Any tags you like". Please, let local mappers to choose the tags. Timur_Crimea may use "shop=motorcycle_parts" tag if he wants it. | |
| 13 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | I have zero problem with him using the shop=motorcycle tag on objects that are motorcycle shops. What I have problem with is him or anyone else tagging an object as shop=motorcycle when it stretches what the object actually is and requires the use of 4 extra namespace tags just so people dont think... | |
| 14 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | I've been more then resonable and explained the reason for the edit and how it was based on the guidelines, your free to disagree, but the way your treating me over it isnt the way to resolve this. | |
| 15 | ~ 5 years ago | Timur_Crimea ♦22 | Adamant1, I didn’t answer you because I sent a request to DWG so that they would explain what to do better and not create a war of corrections here. | |
| 16 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | I figured that was why you didn't answer, but if someone stops the discussion half way through it the only thing to assume is that they don't think it's an issue anymore. Especially if they don't even say they disagree. Generally, no response is implicit agreement. Like if I... | |
| 17 | ~ 5 years ago | Timur_Crimea ♦22 | I think that for the correct recognition of the map by navigation programs, it is better to use established tags. With the permission of the DWG management, I will return my revision back. | |
| 18 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Shop=motorcycle is established and I said it was fine to use. Just not the namespace tags, because they aren't. For example motorcycle:sales=no only has 97 uses, there's no wiki article for it, and it's never been discussed or accepted for this kind of usage. There's also been a ... | |
| 19 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | I'll also say that if the only way you can accurately describe the object is by using the namespace tags to "clarify" the shop tag then it's clearly the wrong tag. No one is going to disagree with that. | |
| 20 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | You can't add whatever tags you want onto an object just because it's tagged with an established tag either. So, even if shop=motorcycle was correct here, it wouldn't mean the namespace tags would automatically be valid to use "because, well, uuhhh, shop=motorcycle is established... | |
| 86192623 by Adamant1 @ 2020-06-04 13:35 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | TravGW ♦355 | You are sure about moving the repair tags to their own node? By moving to a generic repair shop you're losing the opening hours, phone number, website, and other important dealership data. If someone where to search for a motorcycle repair shop all that would be return is a generic repair shop ... |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | It depends on the situation I guess. A lot of times the hours, phone number, etc are different so it's warranted and that's what the Wiki recommends. And also generally in cases where somewhere does multiple things that could be tagged separately as a top level tags. I actually went ba... | |
| 85675181 by Adamant1 @ 2020-05-24 08:56 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | Mateusz Konieczny ♦9,513 | rental=bicycle is kind of useless and removing it should be OK (AFAIK it has neither accepted proposal, nor support and amenity=bicycle_rental is in clear use).But "One feature, one OSM element" is about something a bit different, and using multiple tags to tag one object is not viola... |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Mateusz Konieczny ♦9,513 | Wiki was not clear - I added https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element#Multiple_tags (and made some other improvements there) | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | OK. That makes sense. That's for the clarification and also for improving the Wiki article. Things definitely could have been phrased a little better. | |
| 85635692 by Adamant1 @ 2020-05-23 02:17 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | camelCaseNick ♦174 | Hey,name:wiki(data|pedia) are not common tags in OSM. You mean species:wikidata?CamelCaseNick |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Hey. Uummm I don't know. There's 3,389 uses of it for Wikipedia. I'd say that's a good number. Although, it does look like there's only 285 uses of it with Wikidata for some reason. They must just have not caught up with each other in tagging yet or something. Which is one o... | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | camelCaseNick ♦174 | Sorry,it's definitely not a species. After looking into it: It's about a specif tree. The wikidata tag was correct, the way it was before. | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | So, your saying the Wikidata tag was correct without the namespace? I don't know. Why's that? I think a case could be made for why both are "correct." The namespace is just adding extra details, it's not changing it into a completely different tag. I'm don't really... | |
| 5 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Also are you saying name:wikidata is wrong just in this case or is it wrong in all cases? | |
| 6 | ~ 5 years ago | camelCaseNick ♦174 | In this specific case both are wrong, as the Wikipedia article and the Wikidata item describe this specific tree and not the name of the tree. (Even though the article starts with the word name, it does not actually describe the name Luna per se.)I have change that in https://www.openstreetmap.o... | |
| 7 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | I mean, I didn't really need a broader explanation of how Wikipedia/Wikidata tags work. I'm not the main/top calibrator on the NSI because I don't understand what brand:wikidata is used for. Also, usually it's better if there is a disagreement about over tagging to wait until bot... | |
| 8 | ~ 5 years ago | camelCaseNick ♦174 | "like you say it's not really about the tree per se"?Actually I said quiet the opposite.The wikipedia article is _only_ about this specific tree. There is only one tree named Luna, that is about 1000 years old, is about 200 feet tall and had a tree sitting. This is exactly about t... | |
| 9 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | The Wikipedia article seemed more about the protests involving it then the tree itself, but I guess that's kind of grey. So then subject:wikipedia/wikidata would be the correct tag? Since both are about the particular tree. It still might be worth discussing the ambiguity of the name:wi... | |
| 10 | ~ 5 years ago | camelCaseNick ♦174 | Yes, the ambiguity here is, that Wikipedia articles are less strict than OpenStreetMap objects and Wikidata items.So you might interpret it as an article about a tree with a focus on the tree sitting – that made it notable, or you might see it as an article about a tree sitting of a tree.\... | |
| 11 | ~ 5 years ago | camelCaseNick ♦174 | And yes, the meaning of name:wikidata and name:etymology:wikidata would need a proper discussion. Pretty sure, the changeset comments aren't the best place for it though. | |
| 12 | ~ 5 years ago | camelCaseNick ♦174 | Okay, so now http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q7746663 is about the tree Luna and http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q95308630 about the tree sitting. | |
| 13 | ~ 5 years ago | camelCaseNick ♦174 | Sorry, the first link was the book about the tree sitting on the tree Luna written be the participant of the tree sitting.Luna's item is http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q6703503. | |
| 84547288 by Adamant1 @ 2020-05-03 05:42 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | Andreas Binder ♦257 | Why did you removed the boat:*-Tags. According https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:boat:type the tagging was correct. Now after your improvement canoe rental is missing and clothes=boat and boat=canoe;kayak without a wikidefinition is used. |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Hello. Of course the article for boat:type would say boat:type is the key to use. That's it's purpose. It was created by someone who thinks namespaces should be used everywhere. Even in cases where there is a more accepted tag. Which he intentionally leaves out of articles. Simply put, boa... | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Also, the person who created the boat:type article is a known fraud that has been blocked both on here and the wiki multiple times and intentionally suggests bad tags with better alternatives that are actually accepted by the community. So, there's zero reason to go with boat:type IMO. | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Btw, it's pretty well known in OSM and mostly agreed on that the intent of OSM isn't be a place to store "inventory" type information like this anyway. Since it's not really geographical information or even about a geographical feature. So, at least the information is still ... | |
| 5 | ~ 5 years ago | Andreas Binder ♦257 | https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dboat also the boat:*-Tags and boat=* was added by yourself last month. boat=* is an access tag (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:boat).Would you be so kind to recreate the canoe rental tag, which was deleted by your changeset? | |
| 6 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | After a discussion where other people said it was an existing usage. Otherwise, I wouldn't have put it in the article. I dont apreciate being like I'm being dishonest about it either. I got better things to do then deal with paranoid crap. Ultimately I could care less which tag is used. Ex... | |
| 7 | ~ 5 years ago | Andreas Binder ♦257 | No, boat=* is used as an acess tag => see https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/boat Please restore the canoe rental (you can see it in the object history, that your removed the tag). | |
| 8 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | And its also used for tagging the type of boat dude. Get the hell over it. I'm not making it up. Im not doing crap for you at this point when your accusing me of lying. I have a normal life outside of this that I'm currently attending yo and I'm not going to jump just brcause you say ... | |
| 9 | ~ 5 years ago | Andreas Binder ♦257 | I am not accusing you of lying. I said hat boat=* is used as an access tag (according taginfo 98.92% are "yes" or "no" values) and I said that you deleted the canoe rental for this poi. I hope you fix the canoe rental and rethink the use of boat=* as an replacement for boat:type. | |
| 10 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Service is used for multiple things also. Tags work that way sometimes. There was a mass edit of boat POIs a while back by the aformentioned huxter that switched all the tags over to namespaces like boat:type. Which could by why the boat tags are low for this now. Either way, its not like boat:type ... | |
| 11 | ~ 5 years ago | Andreas Binder ♦257 | "Im not "replacing" boat:type because it wasnt an accepted tag in the first place and only has any use because of un-discussed mass edit and edit war."This poi was until yesterday never changed by a mass edit or edit war in the past (see https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/669... | |
| 12 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | I was talking about more generally. In 10 years boat:type has only had like 50 uses, whatever it might be locally, and more then half where do to a single edit in 2017 that switched whatever tag it was before to boat:type. Personally, I could care less about this particular instance, but it is bette... | |
| 13 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | I added back rental in the form of kayak_rental and canoe_rental since they have like 8 times more use then rental:boat and are clearly preferred. If you think it should be different, then feel free to change it. I'm done here though. | |
| 14 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Same goes for boat versus boat:type | |
| 15 | ~ 5 years ago | Andreas Binder ♦257 | Thank you for recreating the canoe rental! I startet https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tag:shop=boat#Please_do_not_use_boat.3D.2A_to_show_what_you_can_buy so we can talk about your recently added boat=* for the shop=boat-Wiki. I hope you participate and perhaps we can find a bett... | |
| 16 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Yep. I noticed. I dont feel the need to have yet another conservation about it. Since as I've told you about a hundred times now it was already discussed somewhere. I'm not really into re-legitating things every five minutes or going through a long protracted multiday discussion that I... | |
| 17 | ~ 5 years ago | Andreas Binder ♦257 | Yes, please send me a link to other conversation about using boat=* for shop=boat. This would be very nice! Talking on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tag:shop=boat#Please_do_not_use_boat.3D.2A_to_show_what_you_can_buy would have the advantage for you that its visible for every... | |
| 84547876 by Adamant1 @ 2020-05-03 06:05 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | Constable ♦1,294 | Hi Adam, shouldn't we just add amenity=ski_rental to the shop=rental node inead of completely removing shop tag?Wiki page seems a bit confusing to me though https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dski_rentalThanks |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Hey there. Hhhmm, I don't know. It looks like from their Facebook page that all they do is rental. If that is the case it would be wrong to tag them as a shop IMO, but then down at the bottom of their sign they do use the word "shop." So it's a tough call. https://www.facebook.... | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | Constable ♦1,294 | I'll go check that out the first time I'll be in Livigno.Agree with you and with the idea that a rental might be actually something different from a shop (so no shop tag needed), as amenity=car_rental, but at the same time we have the shop=rental tag, which confuses me a bit, as it shoul... | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Sounds like a plan. It looks like from a picture that they might sell glasses and gloves. I don't know if that rises to calling them a shop though if it's just a small side thing. I totally agree about shop=rental confusing the whole thing. I think the only reason it exists is for plac... | |
| 5 | ~ 5 years ago | Adamant1 | Or it's just to general to. | |
| 76569890 by Adamant1 @ 2019-11-04 05:39 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | UAN51 ♦15 | Volunteer responding - GNIS tags MUST be preserved! |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Really? Why's that? Show me anywhere in the OSM guidelines where it says GIS "MUST!Q!!!!!!@#!#$@$" be PRESERVED!!@!!!!!!. People delete them in all kinds of situations all the time (for instance with TIGER imported roads). As they are essentially useless and just make it harder for pe... | |
| 3 | ~ 6 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | adman, calm down and lay off the methanol. unlike the 20 to 30 per day fortified added-sugar beers i've resorted to for lack of good Reinheitsgebot beverages, i'm sure it can't be good for you.TIGER roads probably do not have GNIS data. tiger was an import with a lot of question... | |
| 4 | ~ 6 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | Hello, Andy from OSM's Data Working Group here. Echoing freebeer's comments it'd be great if everyone could calm down a bit. Firstly, the historical tags on objects can be seen at http://osm.mapki.com/history/way.php?id=283793237 . In this case someone expolicitly added them in... | |
| 5 | ~ 6 years ago | UAN51 ♦15 | Well, here's the wiki page about GNIS https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/USGS_GNIS and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/Data"The Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) is the authoritative database on place names. The tags may possibly be imprecise in position, so... | |
| 6 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Sorry for the heatedness on my side. It just seems like there's been an almost constant onslaught of people taking issue with things that aren't issues in an extremely passive aggressive manor. Which has just put me on edge. In this case use of capitals and exclamation marks in UAN51'... | |
| 7 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | A few thoughts about the GNIS thing now that I have looked into is that the only reason given for why we shouldn't delete GNIS tags is because "GNIS if possibly the only database in the US to share work from OSM." I'd say 1. In both instances of that being mentioned the sent... | |
| 8 | ~ 6 years ago | MikeN ♦357 | There was some talk of exchanging GNIS updates with OSM, but once the current OSM license terms solidified, it's clear that it would not be within the OSM data license terms. | |
| 9 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Thanks for the information. That's what I figured. | |
| 10 | ~ 6 years ago | UAN51 ♦15 | Anywhere on the wiki or someplace that discuss about removal of GNIS? I'm only seeing wiki pages that says to keep them. | |
| 11 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | I don't think there has to be. The responsibility is on you to justify why the tags shouldn't be deleted. As Andy said, "If anyone has a particular reason to keep tags like "gnis:created" around then please do explain that, and link to where it was discussed with the communi... | |
| 12 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | UAN51, go to https://taghistory.raifer.tech/ and look at the tagging history for gnis:feature_id, etc. All of them where added in a single import in 2009, which contentious at the time and still is, and they have all been on a steady decline since then. The use of gnis:state_id has gone down by almo... | |
| 13 | ~ 6 years ago | Minh Nguyen ♦599 | The gnis:feature_id tag and its synonyms are also documented at <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:gnis:feature_id>. Unlike many other import tags, gnis:feature_id contains a stable external identifier. In that sense, it’s quite like a Wikidata QID, except that it’s the U.S. ... | |
| 14 | ~ 6 years ago | Minh Nguyen ♦599 | * virtually all parks in GNIS, that is | |
| 15 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | I appreciate you bringing that up. I didn't know it was an option. I have zero problem with converting them to QIDs where I can going forward. I only delete them in extremely rare cases anyway. I can't remember why I did here. I probably would have been cool with UAN51 just adding them bac... | |
| 16 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | I had actually suggested we take it to the tagging mailing list to get it clarified better, but UAN51 said not to because it was "personal" and that he didn't want other people getting involved in it. So I never did. Looking back I probably should have though. | |
| 17 | ~ 6 years ago | UAN51 ♦15 | Calm down Adamant1. I'm only doing what the Wiki says. If you actually clicked and read the links I sent above, you should have seen the part where it says "he tags may possibly be imprecise in position, so GNIS-tagged features should be corrected for position and especially name, keeping ... | |
| 18 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Obviously I read the wiki pages because I directly quoted them multiple times. Its cool though. I know the whole "well, you just must not of read it" or whatever similar argument is a pretty popular refrain on here when people are disagreed with. So, I'll give you a pass on it. We... | |
| 19 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Hhhmm, it seems this park doesn't have a QID. Bummer. Oh well. It's not like it's in my state anyway. I don't want the locals here to go off me for editing things where I don't live anyway. "shrug." Maybe someone who cares about it and lives here can create one for... | |
| 20 | ~ 6 years ago | Minh Nguyen ♦599 | There’s nothing inherently wrong with contributing in an area where you don’t live or haven’t visited lately. That’s called armchair editing and I’m guiltier of it than anyone in this thread.Once you get comfortable enough with OSM, you should feel free to fix what ... | |
| 21 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Minh, I did do a search for it on Wikidata. I thought that entry was for a different park though. My bad. Thanks for adding it. | |
| 75700716 by Adamant1 @ 2019-10-15 06:57 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | Jarek 🚲 ♦358 | This changeset has been reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/77490063 - this is not a chicken fast food place |
| 77110404 by Adamant1 @ 2019-11-15 07:50 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | goedegazelle ♦250 | Are you aware that PDOK is outdated in that area? That park has recently been overhauled as you can see with respect to the newly added stream that does not appear in PDOK. |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | dvdhoven ♦956 | There is another problem.A park should lay over the landuses as a transparant, The landuses are removed and now the detalis are gone. | |
| 3 | ~ 6 years ago | dvdhoven ♦956 | Reverted by my changeset 77133531It was a kind of vandalism. | |
| 4 | ~ 6 years ago | dvdhoven ♦956 | Now that the grass and forest is back, it should be adjusted to the new park | |
| 5 | ~ 6 years ago | dvdhoven ♦956 | And as you can see in Maproulette the only challenge is to remove tags like leisure_1, leisure_2, etc not to remove the area's tagged with landuse=...You have totally misunderstood the challenge!!! | |
| 6 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Well, I have no idea what I did or didn't do wrong now because it was reverted before I had a chance to comment. Maybe next time wait until the person your chiding for something has a chance or to respond before you revert them for whatever it is your hassle them about that you think is better ... | |
| 7 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Btw, since you clearly have a vast and superior understanding of everything related to OSM, you would know that the purpose of outside, imported GIS data isn't to use in perpetuity to quell your neurosis by reseting the map to how you like it. For all you know I might have been planning on mapp... | |
| 8 | ~ 6 years ago | goedegazelle ♦250 | Adding insult to injury does not make it look any better, Adament1. You removed data without any knowledge of the area, without any reliable source and without any discussion. The reversion was justified and I am glad that it happened. | |
| 9 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | goedegazelle, good for you. I don't care if your glad the revert happened. The OSM rules, what constutes a valid edit, or when to revert someone isn't based on our feelings. If you have a an actual reason why you think the revert was justified go ahead and give it. Otherwise, don't le... | |
| 10 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Also Geodegazelle, show me any where that says satellite images aren't a usable source, that people have to discuss things before editing them, or that they are required to have local knowledge? dvdhoven didn't even revert me based on local knowledge anyway. Otherwise he would have done it... | |
| 76546936 by Adamant1 @ 2019-11-03 10:08 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | UAN51 ♦15 | Volunteer responding - Pleasant Valley Road Athletic Complex should be a park because KCMO Parks and Rec own this land. It's also labeled as a park in the Parcel Viewer. |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | "Pleasant Valley Road Athletic Complex should be a park because KCMO Parks and Rec own this land" Not to be a jerk, but I'm tired of having these conversations. No where in the park or sports complex wiki pages does it say their usage depends on who owns the entity. Its about the ... | |
| 71745712 by Adamant1 @ 2019-06-29 23:37 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | dekatherm Active block | Comment not displayed. To view it, please select the "Include blocked users" option. |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Hi dekatherm. Thanks for the encouragement on my cleanup efforts. It's much appreciated. Unfortunately, I'm not sure why I deleted the park type tag in this particular instance. Generally though park:type isn't a good way to describe parks IMHO. As things like "state park&quo... | |
| 70344550 by Adamant1 @ 2019-05-17 06:42 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | i'm just picking one random changeset, but it looks as if you're deleting a lot of relation outers without taking care of the inners. the inners would previously act as gaps.now these inners are being rendered as outers, also filling the osmi cyan all over cali. that is the result of... |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Keep deleting I guess. That's what would/am doing. None of these little farmyard areas are that anyway. Whatever the relation details are. What are using for QA? I tried to review some stuff in OSM Inspector but it's just giving me a pink screen for some reason. | |
| 3 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | *or they are double mapped as farmyard/farmland (both of which are usually wrong). | |
| 4 | ~ 6 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | the osm inspector has been in a state of titsup for maybe six hours since it started failing intermittently with some points returning an error i can't reproduce now, with a server path, because it seems to have been given a kick a few minutes ago and is no longer blanking over the underlying ... | |
| 73984428 by Adamant1 @ 2019-09-02 00:42 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | mvexel ♦146 | Adding the POI tags to the building outline instead of keeping a separate node inside the building is okay, but not undisputed. If there's multiple POI inside one building, this tagging style doesn't work. I'm not saying you shouldn't do it this way, I just wanted to make sure yo... |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Hi there. I'm aware of the discussion and that both are acceptable. I don't usually have a preference for mapping details on the building outline over having separate POI's. Except recently I've been running into a lot of places where the address details are mapped on the buildin... | |
| 3 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Btw, it also helps the POI details to not stray from the buildings they are associated with. I've seen a lot of places where POI's were mapped in or moved to the middle of the road in front of the building or even across the street from it. Then it was a hassle figure out where exactly it ... | |
| 4 | ~ 6 years ago | mvexel ♦146 | Yea, those are all good points (pun intended)I don't feel strongly one way or the other, lately I have resorted more to mapping POI as separate nodes, and I may even have copied some POI info from a building to a node and deleted it from the building, but I realize that is just me trying to... | |
| 71085445 by Adamant1 @ 2019-06-10 03:01 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | do you plan to re-map this area, or are you just going to leave the entire riverbank relation broken?if you had done this in brasil, you would have gotten an earful. same with landuses in hungary inaccurately imported.there's someone in georgia (usian) who twisted multipolygons out of ... |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | It's been dealt with. So, you can keep the spoons in the silverware drawer for now. Just so you know, a lot of the relations and other stuff where already screwed up before me. What I did personally mess up (I.E. not finish) got left behind because of being hounded. Otherwise, it would have bee... | |
| 70337176 by Adamant1 @ 2019-05-16 22:24 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | hi adam,came across this changeset with osmi to see it has left behind https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1015365 with a single member https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/64297575 .was your intent to delete that landuse=forest entirely, or to improve upon it?just trying to clean up a bit... |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | I'm pretty sure my intent was to delete the landuse=forest entirely and that got accidentally left behind after SteveA wen't off on me somewhere around here about deleting forests. After that I kind of abandoned the whole thing. Anyway, I took care of it. Thanks for mention it. Hopeful... | |
| 72731833 by Adamant1 @ 2019-07-28 08:05 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | yep, this changeset is the second of the earlier linked trio around red bluff. the vertical line only has node 970, while the horizontal pairs it with 968, while 969 is located somewhere else entirely.in some edits i fix, i see four or more nodes piled up, so i wonder if they were meant to appe... |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Hhhmmm, I check for this stuff on my end when doing edits and I never see it happening on the edit side. So, I'm under the impression this is something happening on iD Editor's side that isn't due to bad mapping habits. Who knows when its happening or why though. If I read things on ... | |
| 3 | ~ 6 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | blast. my previous firefox session wherein i had links to the erroneous fence is gone, so i can't link directly to demonstrate my observations.i've seen it enough to suspect a pattern.amazon is not using what i consider a fork the way dragonflyBSD is a fork from freeLSD, but what ... | |
| 4 | ~ 6 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | adam, i did not even notice that this was your 11'999th edit until just now. but to add a further observation, from an amazon edit from nothingness i just mended, user drew a-b-c-d, then went back to branch from c. duplicate node e, co-locaated with c, was uploaded. in the order of the fir... | |
| 5 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Yep. That's pretty funny. It's pretty crazy I've had that many edits in only like 2 1/2 years also. All with no imports. I was totally planning on retiring at 10,000 edits, but now I'm thinking 20,000. I should probably call it good and get a girlfriend or something instead, but ... | |
| 6 | ~ 6 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | by the way, don't you invoke your editor with a middle-button click in a new tab? i'm into that habit because of how painfully slow reloading and redrawing any page is so by now i have something like a hundred tabs to sort through with enough works-in-progress that i almost hope for a cra... | |
| 72053213 by Adamant1 @ 2019-07-09 12:30 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | moin adam,i see this meadow (meadow? he asks from the alps) is flagged as self-intersecting by osmi, and i also see crossing ways warnings above.as i step through suspicious nodes, i discover https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6598905370 at v3 is twice a member of https://www.openstreetmap.org... |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | No meadows in the alps huh? If so, I'm kind of envious. There's to many of them around here for my taste. Anyway, I'm not sure what causes this. I don't think I would have done it at the time, but it's possible. Although iD Editor really shouldn't be allowing me to if I... | |
| 3 | ~ 6 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | i expect meadows to be green year round. although admittedly some were starting to resemble the mapnik scrub after four months without rain last summer. what the background imageries here reminded me of was something else not pleasant to plop down on during a hot summer day and sink into a bed of ... | |
| 4 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Yeah, I semi agree there about meadows. The way I see them they should have flowers and "green stuff" year round. I'm only going with them here because the wiki definition includes grazing land. So does farmland, which I guess I could have gone with, but to me a field of grass out in ... | |
| 72474822 by Adamant1 @ 2019-07-21 06:40 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | got a duplicate node here at or on https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6634705965 and i didn't expect pothead to do *that* just now like that.i also see the close nodes warning above, that this presumably is.jus' sayin', that's all |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Hmmm, weird. Nothing showed up in iD Editor or OSM Inspector about it. iD Editor really needs better overlapping node checks. Their intersecting ways or whatever test isn't that great either. Anyway, at least it's fixed. Thanks for mentioning it. | |
| 3 | ~ 6 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | the osm inspector actually does, and if you look to https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-122.33028&lat=40.25228&zoom=10&baselayer=PublicTransport&opacity=0.69&overlays=self_intersection_ways,self_intersection_points,single_node_in_way,duplicate_node_in_way for ... | |
| 72581105 by Adamant1 @ 2019-07-24 02:27 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | woodpeck ♦2,537 | Dear Adamant1, a while ago I asked you and stevea to refrain from editing each other's data in order to calm down tensions between the two of you. In this changeset you have made changes to a state park and in the course of doing that, removed a tag added by stevea a while ago. I understand tha... |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Woodpeck, I wrote you a private message about this. Id appreciate it if you would read it and follow up on the issue I mentioned at the end of it. Thank you, Adamant1 | |
| 71745810 by Adamant1 @ 2019-06-29 23:49 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | park:type is a wiki ( https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key:park:type ) Adamant1 himself started, about which HE made contributions to in a table IN that wiki showing, at least initially, that he made some good-faith efforts to reach better consensus to facilitate deprecating the tag. Then, after horrific ... |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Nope. I'm not doing this crap with you. I said leave me and my edits the hell alone. So do it. I didn't say I would never re-tag a park again. I said I was done discussing it with you because of your threats, attitude, and inability to not go off or consider feedback. Again, you go off abo... | |
| 3 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | (For further reference also see changeset 71432976. Where SteveA already contacted me about this after I already asked him not to talk to me anymore and where I already addressed this subject in detail.) | |
| 4 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | (And yet, Adam DID do "this crap" with OSM, even as he simultaneously says "I'm not.") It is easy to be confused by Adam's "say one thing, do another" behavior. I have now seen it so often and so persistently by him that to me, it seems deliberate on his par... | |
| 5 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | This kind of long, unproductive message full of personal attacks and comments like "Perhaps sticking to fence lines and "adding stuff" is more Adam's kind of mapping" are the epitome of going off and are the exact opposite of civil. I gave a detailed and civil response about... | |
| 6 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | The suggestion to stick to mapping Adam already knows is intended to give him a positive path towards productive mapping, should he choose to take it. It is precisely crafted to BE civil. It was/is not meant as an attack, though it may qualify as damning him with faint praise.Whether Adam and ... | |
| 7 | ~ 6 years ago | mapman44 ♦527 | https://jtbogden.blogspot.com/2011/01/you-cannot-win-argument-dale-carnegie.html | |
| 8 | ~ 6 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | how is it that i have had reasonably civilised conversations with both parties, yet here things fall apart in a way i do not like to read in me drunken state (if you're gonna flame, be creative, you wunch of bankers. no that's not creative)i'd quote iandees but personally i'... | |
| 9 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | No clue. Maybe being drunk would help. I map buzzed sometimes, but it mostly leads to me staring at the map in some random place without blinking for long periods while mumbling "wow" repeatedly. So, I don't think it would help the conversation any. Except maybe to cause it to not occ... | |
| 10 | ~ 6 years ago | woodpeck ♦2,537 | For reference, both users being asked to play nice in https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2989 https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2990 | |
| 11 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Woodpeck, I appreciate yours and the DWG's involvement in this finally. While I'm 100% responsible for my own behavior and have zero urge to "play the victim", I would appreciate it if you could clarify a few things for me so similar things don't happen in the future. So I w... | |
| 12 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | I'd say to ask it in the open and it would be better. | |
| 13 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | Adamant1 just contacted me via private message after being told many many many times that this is unwelcome, yet he persists in doing so. He appears to be trying to "do something" by this (and keeping it private) after above he immediately asked to do this (keep it private) with woodpeck.... | |
| 14 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | "anybody would BE able to understand." | |
| 15 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | I contacted you privately to say I wasn't going to respond to your comment here because I didn't want to get us both in trouble for discussing things publicly when we were told not to. He was pretty crystal clear about us not contacting each other. Which you did, again, after being told no... | |
| 16 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | I did not contact the individual known as Adamant1 as he said I did above; that is yet another of his untruths. I did state in this public place that he private-messaged me after being warned — an hour before by an administrator who blocked him as well as by me (at least a dozen times) &mdash... | |
| 17 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | OSM community: I once again apologize to you for this spectacle and the difficulty I faced in dealing with it. I will strive to continue to do my best in facing these (hopefully rare) frictions as they occur should they rear their ugly head in the future. And may it never happen to you or your OS... | |
| 71419561 by Adamant1 @ 2019-06-19 23:41 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | not worth mentioning, but since i caught ya red-handed...at the lower right here, there was a duplicate overlapping fence node at the corner, while the other was attached to an unduplicated meadow node.i have deleted the unattached one, so no action needed. i'm curious as to how countr... |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Hi there. It's cool. It happened to a bunch more fences that I had to delete. I wish was paying more attention to what was going on the moment it happened. I think I was panning away from what I was mapping, but I could have also had a save go wrong right before that. I can't really rememb... | |
| 3 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | My inclination is to think it's double loading things from both the memory and the website after a saving error caused by network congestion. In that case a few things in the changeset will get through, but it reloads the whole changeset from memory, while loading back into memory what was alre... | |
| 4 | ~ 6 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | nice try, but it fails to jive with the evidence :-)this is actually nothing to do with this changeset - v1 of the way was created 8 days ago, and the node in question, -389, was created then. nodes are numbered sequentially at time of their creation, and it sits perfectly between -388 and -390... | |
| 71432976 by Adamant1 @ 2019-06-20 08:27 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | These are not "clearly" wrong, they are under discussion in the Talk page for park:type at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:park:type#A_proposal_to_reduce_this_tag_.28initially.2C_in_the_USA.29 . Note that this is a PROPOSAL in early stages of discussion, not a "done deal... |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | BTW, just three days ago here https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:leisure%3Dpark#Park_type , Adamant1 said "Both SteveA and I have edited a park:type page to expand further expand on the tagging scheme and to better explain its depreciation in light of better tagging options. It would ... | |
| 3 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Steve, 1. last time I checked the way proposals work is that things are suggested and tried on the map to see what works good and what doesn't. People do it all the time. So your assertion that things can't be re-tagged or whatever just because there's a proposal, which it isn't ... | |
| 4 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Steve, I'd also add a point 5. There's cases where we both agree that replacing the park:type tag is clearly the correct thing to do and where there is completely appropriate/better tags to use. For instance with city and county parks. So it is isn't a cut and dry thing where we have ... | |
| 71432661 by Adamant1 @ 2019-06-20 08:21 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | It's called a park, it has facilities like a park, it seems like a park to me. I ask you to please restore the leisure=park tag. |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Restored. For record See changeset comment https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/71496802 | |
| 3 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Btw SteveA, this is a good example of the benefits of being civil by just stating what you think should happen and why concisely, without the other not needed personal stuff or the long tangents, which often leads to compromise. Just saying. | |
| 4 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | Thanks for the restoration. | |
| 71433359 by Adamant1 @ 2019-06-20 08:34 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | You removed the park:type tag WITHOUT the concomitant self-inflicted request that we discuss removing the tags in leisure=park?This violates not only good community standards of "discuss removing tags as we say we will first, BEFORE we do so" but it also violates YOUR OWN REQUEST from ... |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | See changeset comment here https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/71432976As all points made there apply in this case (especially the ones pertaining to making personal comments and attacks, the endless bad faithing, and similar things). | |
| 58939222 by Adamant1 @ 2018-05-14 05:07 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | hi adam,this is a long-standing issue, and i am trying to understand how i am finding several such problems where you have created overlapping nodes at junctions.these are flagged by the osm inspector, and there is a swarm around california that have not yet been acted upon, but the last few... |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Hhmm, odd. I can't think of anything on my end that I've specifically done to cause this problem. I noticed a few weeks ago that there's been a bunch of disconnected ways people have fixed related to roads and paths I've edited that I didn't notice at the time either. Its ha... | |
| 3 | ~ 6 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | thanks. this was actually the last node i edited/not for which you were responsible. another mapper appeared to the south with this issue, but as i have no history with that mapper, i figured the best way is to quietly fix things.in your case, i think we know ourselves so it does not matter. ... | |
| 4 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Oh hey, freebeer can you do me a bigly favor by going to the link and figuring out why the administrative boundary there isn't displaying? It's been on the map but not showing up for like 5 years now and I haven't been able to figure out why. As it's not really my area of experti... | |
| 5 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Btw, I opened a note about here https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1797596Maybe you could comment there if you figure anything out. | |
| 70094551 by Adamant1 @ 2019-05-10 02:58 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | After being edited in this changeset, relation/1015348 is made up entirely of inner members, a nonsensical OSM relation construct. In short, this national forest is now wrong not because of its data but because it was edited in OSM to become a relation that makes no sense.Before deleting an out... |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | The relation made up entirely of inner's will also be dealt with eventually. If it takes a few edits to deal with bad data because it relates to a bunch of other bad data, it doesn't mean said bad shouldn't be dealt with. In the mean time, if you want to contribute to the clean up... | |
| 3 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | Am I really to understand that my assertion in this changeset comment of "the data in this changeset have now become nonsensical and incorrect according to what OSM defines as a valid multipolygon" is responded to with: that's OK, these wholly incorrect data will "be dealt with ... | |
| 4 | ~ 6 years ago | iandees ♦766 | 😩Come on you two. *Please* don't start this pattern again. | |
| 5 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | OK, I'm resigning this issue here and now. | |
| 6 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | iandees, SteveA's the one with the problem here.Not me. I explained the edit and said there was nothing more to say about it. I stand by that. learly just trying to pick a fight here over something that's not worth having a fight over because it's a none issue. So it would be good if ... | |
| 7 | ~ 6 years ago | iandees ♦766 | Neither of you need to convince me of anything. I don't have time to read the thousands of words written between you two and as excuses to me.Just be adults. If that's difficult, then maybe this project isn't the right fit for you. | |
| 8 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Fine. will do. Already was. | |
| 9 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Btw, I was already going to ignore SteveA before you commented. So there wasn't going to be any arguing in the first place. You commenting just extended this unnecessarily. Ignoring someone is the "adult" thing to do. As much as we could both "just be adults" by not argu... | |
| 10 | ~ 6 years ago | iandees ♦766 | My comments are directly related to your edits and are a reflection on how you interact with the community, Adamant1. When you're mapping as part of a community, your behavior and attitude towards others in that community are more important than your mapping. When I say "be an adult",... | |
| 11 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | "I mean don't bicker, write short and succinct messages"1. I wasn't bickering in my first message and I had zero intent to write anything after that until you got involved. You said yourself you don't have time to read our long messages, but then your throwing around acc... | |
| 12 | ~ 6 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | @iandees - (again) thanks.@stevea and @Adamant1 - you both care about OSM. We get that. However please do try and concentrate on the data, on on each other. There is literally nothing to be gained from throwing 2k and 3k changeset discussion comments at each other. | |
| 69653228 by Adamant1 @ 2019-04-28 02:05 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | Hm, a protect_class key but no boundary=protected_area, that's not right. You could add boundary=protected area if you insist that the protect_class is correct (is it?) or you could add boundary=national_park and delete the protect_class key/value pair.It would be good to stick to one cons... |
| 69623505 by Adamant1 @ 2019-04-27 03:03 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | Boundaries don't "fit imagery," they simply "are." Especially when from authoritative sources, like the SCCGIS v5 and CPAD v2 data noted in our county wiki.As not even the source of WHICH imagery was used (nor its offset), this amounts to needlessly replacing perfectly ... |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | "This strongly appears to be some flavor of vandalism." I knew you were going to take that route after you repeatedly told me to stop discussing things and just edit them. I specifically asked if you were going to do that to and you said you weren't. Pretty petty and vindictive. \... | |
| 3 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | Yes, "shut up and map" on my part turned into vandalism on your part. While you might make a case I was rude, I can and do make a case you are a vandal. | |
| 4 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | You must have not been able to, or I 100% guarantee you would have. Especially after all the copulating about it on the park talk page and getting me banned. Which is why you decided to just edit war me and revert my edits yourself. Oh well. Another day, another fake controversy by Stevea to deflect... | |
| 59485625 by Adamant1 @ 2018-06-02 13:34 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | Minh Nguyen ♦599 | Did the note say this road has a 15 mph speed limit? That would’ve been mistaken; the road actually has a 30 mph speed limit. I wonder if the author of the note had gotten confused with the light rail speed limits near here. |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Hhhmm, I think so. It could have been confusion on the persons part. I usually check the street sign overlay though. It seems to give a bunch of different speeds along this road. Like it says it's 50mph and then a couple of feet away it says 30. So it could have been my mistake. Maybe I just we... | |
| 3 | ~ 6 years ago | Minh Nguyen ♦599 | Unfortunately, Mapillary sign detections can be unreliable, too. In my experience, in an urban area, you end up always having to check out the actual Mapillary imagery, using the sign overlay only as a guide.I was going through speed limit sign detections in this neighborhood last night (which i... | |
| 69628743 by Adamant1 @ 2019-04-27 04:47 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | Boundaries don't "fit imagery," they simply "are." Especially when from authoritative sources, like the SCCGIS v5 and CPAD v2 data noted in our county wiki.From which of three imagery_used layers?This amounts to needlessly replacing perfectly valid data with lower-qu... |
| 69628982 by Adamant1 @ 2019-04-27 05:00 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | Boundaries don't "fit imagery," they simply "are." Especially when from authoritative sources, like the SCCGIS v5 and CPAD v2 data noted in our county wiki.From which of three imaging sources cited?This amounts to needlessly replacing perfectly valid data with lower-... |
| 69634311 by Adamant1 @ 2019-04-27 09:09 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | A boundary that went "to (too) far right" based on what source? One of the two imagery_used layers in your imagery_used tag? Boundaries don't "fit imagery," they simply "are." Especially when from authoritative sources, like the SCCGIS v5 and CPAD v2 data noted i... |
| 69634306 by Adamant1 @ 2019-04-27 09:08 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | Boundaries based on what source? One of the three imagery_used layers in your imagery_used tag? Boundaries don't "fit imagery," they simply "are." Especially when from authoritative sources, like the SCCGIS v5 and CPAD v2 data noted in our county wiki.This amounts to n... |
| 69631800 by Adamant1 @ 2019-04-27 07:00 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | A boundary that went "to (too) far right" based on what source? One of the three imagery_used layers in your imagery_used tag? Boundaries don't "fit imagery," they simply "are." Especially when from authoritative sources, like the SCCGIS v5 and CPAD v2 data noted... |
| 69631411 by Adamant1 @ 2019-04-27 06:35 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | These parks aren't "fake," especially when from authoritative sources, like the SCCGIS v5 and CPAD v2 data noted in our county wiki.As not even the source of WHICH imagery layer/source was used (nor its offset), this amounts to needlessly replacing perfectly valid data with lower-... |
| 69629264 by Adamant1 @ 2019-04-27 05:12 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | Boundaries don't "fit imagery," they simply "are." Especially when from authoritative sources, like the SCCGIS v5 and CPAD v2 data noted in our county wiki.As not even the source of WHICH imagery layer/source was used (nor its offset), this amounts to needlessly replacin... |
| 69628557 by Adamant1 @ 2019-04-27 04:32 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | Boundaries don't "fit imagery," they simply "are." Especially when from authoritative sources, like the SCCGIS v5 and CPAD v2 data noted in our county wiki.As not even the source of WHICH imagery layer/source was used (nor its offset), this amounts to needlessly replacin... |
| 69628483 by Adamant1 @ 2019-04-27 04:23 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | Boundaries don't "fit imagery," they simply "are." Especially when from authoritative sources, like the SCCGIS v5 and CPAD v2 data noted in our county wiki.As not even the source of WHICH imagery layer/source was used (nor its offset), this amounts to needlessly replacin... |
| 69627906 by Adamant1 @ 2019-04-27 03:52 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | stevea ♦316 | Boundaries don't "fit imagery," they simply "are." Especially when from authoritative sources, like the SCCGIS v5 and CPAD v2 data noted in our county wiki.As not even the source of WHICH imagery layer/source was used (nor its offset), this amounts to needlessly replacin... |
| 60862296 by Adamant1 @ 2018-07-19 08:41 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | Minh Nguyen ♦599 | This school had been retagged as a park in changeset 51441572 – and renamed to include the word “park” – to disguise the fact that it was intended to optimize for Pokémon Go gameplay. |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Adamant1 | Thanks for the comment. That seems to happen a lot since Pokemon Go doesn't support school grounds. | |
| 63572061 by Adamant1 @ 2018-10-16 11:02 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | escallic ♦14 | What happened to Ramona Court? |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | Adamant1 | Hhmmm good question. Things like that can happen when stuff is mapped wrong and convoluted. I accidently deleted a rather large lake a few weeks ago trying to clean up some horribly mapped farmland. It happens. Luckily it was fixed though. So, free to add Ramona Court back if you think it should be ... | |
| 3 | ~ 7 years ago | Adamant1 | I looked around and couldn't find this "Ramona Court" you speak of. Is it back yet or can you point me in the direction of where it should be? | |
| 4 | ~ 7 years ago | escallic ♦14 | Sorry for late reply. Part of problem was recent urban developments and lack of imagery which btw Digital Globe now reflects though not yet hosted by OSM. So I didn't know exactly where to place the courts until now. I just updated it.The other part of the problem was not knowing exactl... | |
| 5 | ~ 7 years ago | Adamant1 | Thanks for the update. I agree the distinction between what is what when it comes green grassy woodsy things can be confusing. A while back I tried to get people on the wiki to better define what a park is, because I was sick of arguing with people why their front lawns aren't parks after they ... | |
| 60145152 by Adamant1 @ 2018-06-25 10:35 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | IcyMidnight ♦4 | This isn't really a footway. There's grass to sit on, trees, benches, a fountain, etc. People hang out here to read books, etc. |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | there is also advice to use place=square to mark a plaza, which perhaps may fit better.not sure about rendering though. | |
| 3 | ~ 7 years ago | Adamant1 | Oh yeah, I originally tagged it as footway=sqaure. That must of been before I knew about place=square. I'm down for changing it. As freebeer says though, who knows about rendering. The question is if its worth it. I don't think place=square renders without the highway=footway tag being inv... | |
| 4 | ~ 7 years ago | IcyMidnight ♦4 | I think the "plaza" part of the name is more about the performance/gathering space at the corner of the Fillmore & O'Farrell where music happens on the weekends, etc. The inside feels like the many mini-parks around the city with the big waterfall/fountain, grass, tables, benches,... | |
| 5 | ~ 7 years ago | IcyMidnight ♦4 | E.g. http://sfrecpark.org/destination/fillmore-turk-mini-park/ & http://sfrecpark.org/destination/golden-gate-steiner-mini-park/ are just a few blocks away | |
| 58666630 by Adamant1 @ 2018-05-04 04:17 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | 217541OSM ♦29 | Good job with the powerlines and that, but what purpose do ways 585556123 and 585556121 (I think they are the same thing) serve? They seem incomplete |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | 217541OSM ♦29 | It also doesn't look like a grazing land | |
| 3 | ~ 7 years ago | Adamant1 | I don't know what your referring to. I didn't do anything with power lines or grazing land. I don't know which ways things your talking about on the map as far as the ways go either. Since I still haven't figure out how to go through changesets properly and such. I'll assume... | |
| 61004897 by Adamant1 @ 2018-07-24 04:16 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | Polarbear ♦944 | Dear Adamant1, thanks for updating the geometry of residential roads. It would be even better if you preserve the history of existing roads by moving them, instead of deleting/recreating. Thanks. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changese... |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | Adamant1 | Your welcome. 99% of the time I do. It was particular messed up in this area though, with a lot of none existant roads, crossing each other ar wierd angles, that were making it impossible to see where the actual roads were. So just moving them wasn't an option. I took care to study Bing Street ... | |
| 3 | ~ 7 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | (finally bothering to log in)While I have not used it myself, I believe there is a JOSM function or plug-in, Replace Geometry, which from my understanding, would be ideal to preserve the history.Mostly I read it mentioned for building imports, to preserve original contributors' sloppy mappi... | |
| 4 | ~ 7 years ago | Adamant1 | Hey freebeer. I'll have to check that out. As it is ID editor currently has a three or four step proccess just to split nodes. Let along move and reatach them. There's an issue requesting it be simplifed thats being considered. Hopefully they put it through. I really need to put some time ... | |
| 5 | ~ 7 years ago | Polarbear ♦944 | @both, yes I use JOSM/Replace Geometry a lot in such cases. It comes with the https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Help/Plugin/UtilsPlugin2A few hours earlier I could have asked the iD developer directly on SotM/Milano, but it's over today. | |
| 6 | ~ 7 years ago | Adamant1 | @polarbear, good to know it works for that. I'll have to look into it. To bad you couldn't of asked the iD developer in person about it. I would of liked to know his answer. Hope SotM was fun and educational. I wish I could of gone to the one here but I wasn't able to. | |
| 7 | ~ 7 years ago | Adamant1 | P.S. this area could be a de facto example of how horrible TIGER is in some places. It is really surprising how off it is sometimes. | |
| 8 | ~ 7 years ago | bhousel ♦278 | I'm the iD developer. What's your question? | |
| 9 | ~ 7 years ago | Adamant1 | Hi bhousel. We were just discussing the amount of steps it currently takes in iD editor to disconnect, split, and then rejoin nodes. I guess there is an easier way to do it in JOSM. I think Polarbear was wondering if it is something you plan to simplify at some point. I noticed there is currently a... | |
| 60966822 by Adamant1 @ 2018-07-23 02:33 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | Nakaner ♦3,191 | Hi Adamant1,this changeset seems to belong to a long list of other changes having the same pattern. Many users expect that systematic changes are discussed in advance on a suitable mailing list (Talk-us or Talk in that case) because their effect is similar to mechanical editing (governed by the ... |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | Adamant1 | Hello. First, are you referring to a long list of other changes that were my edits or are you clumping my actions in with other people are updated the substation tags? Because I'm not responsible for other peoples behavior and I've updated a couple of hundred like maybe 3 or 4 weeks when I... | |
| 3 | ~ 7 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | hola, señor Ant...I think Michael is trying to point out that the GNIS name of the POI here, neither matches its previous tagging in OSM or - if I understand substation as a Trafo correctly, I may well be wrong - the tagging you have given it.I would expect the proper term to be generator... | |
| 4 | ~ 7 years ago | Adamant1 | Hola, friend Freebeer (Your still on my list even if you took me off yours. Humpf). Thanks for the heads up. You seem to be correct in your assessment. Unfortunately Micheal was sparse on details and I hadn't bothered to look at this particular example before rage messaging due it being late, h... | |
| 60846859 by Adamant1 @ 2018-07-18 18:59 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | dhogan ♦2 | Thanks for the revert. This area will be under construction until 2020 |
| 60232965 by Adamant1 @ 2018-06-28 02:36 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | Mateusz Konieczny ♦9,513 | Sorry for troubling you again :("based on the official shopping center map." Is it on license allowing import to OSM? Unfortunately, by default it is fully copyrighted and requires permission from copyright owner (if you got permission - please mention it in edit descriptions).I kn... |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | Adamant1 | No worries. I seem to be getting an ever growing group of stalkers lately. I prefer that though over no accountability. I was actually never clear on the copyright issue anyway. So I'm glad its being brought up. In this particular case there was nothing explicitly stating the information was ... | |
| 3 | ~ 7 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | Mornin', Ferda Mravanec, Stalker 13 checking in here and sounding off.Methinks in the time you spent replying, you could have fired off a quick mail or call to the management and gotten a permission that would have been fine..There is much that is debate-worthy, and while I would expect t... | |
| 4 | ~ 7 years ago | Adamant1 | Morning, although I agree with you about the wasted time replying versus sending them an email to ask, that could be said for a lot of the note conversation on here and I felt that it was something I needed better clarification on from people more knowledgeable then me about this stuff like you and ... | |
| 5 | ~ 7 years ago | Adamant1 | I just gutted the place. I know it doesn't remove it from the database completely, but at least I did my part to fix my error. Thanks to both of you for bringing it to my attention. Hopefully there is no further issue. A few places I didn't add might of gotten deleted in the process, but t... | |
| 59775747 by Adamant1 @ 2018-06-12 11:58 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 60445289 where the changeset comment is: undo mistaken addition of tunnels going under bridges for ground-level roadways after discussion with mapper |
| 60146672 by Adamant1 @ 2018-06-25 11:19 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | Hi Adamant,could you address https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1437191 pointing here?I suspect a recreational_ground tagging would fit better than commercial or the park it had been, and a lot of GNIS and similar tagging info got lost too.I would detach the area from all the ways meself, but ... |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | Adamant1 | My bad. Its clearly not a commercial area. I was originally trying to get rid of the multiple landuse tags someone had attached to it and I apparently botched it up in process somehow. As an interesting side note to that, there are currently over 4000 instances of stacked landuse_1 and leisure_1 etc... | |
| 59073343 by Adamant1 @ 2018-05-18 09:16 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | Polarbear ♦944 | Apparently these letters are not footways, as you tagged them? |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | Polarbear ♦944 | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_San_Francisco_hillside_signhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Letters_in_Sign_Hill_Park_in_South_San_Francisco.png | |
| 3 | ~ 7 years ago | Adamant1 | Yeah, I was kind of aware of that. I wasn't really sure how else to tag them though and have them still be visible. There's path's leading up to them. Plus, they take up a pretty good sized area and should be shown on the map. So it doesn't give the impression there is nothing th... | |
| 58897534 by Adamant1 @ 2018-05-12 08:57 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | Hi Mr Ant,A duplicate bug-report note brought me to this so I thought I'd quickly note:the phone numbers should be in the international format; that is, +[country-code], here +1 , beforehand.I see you put opening hours into a note tag for other mappers, but there is a field with special f... |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | freebeer ♦1,598 | oh yeah, overlooked this earlier in my haste: `tobacoo' or was it tobaccoo? I'll whup it into shape. | |
| 3 | ~ 7 years ago | Adamant1 | Thanks for the heads up. I'll start putting +1 in the number from now on. As far as the hours goes, I haven't learned how the put them in the tag yet, but I wanted to get the business added at last. So I thought id put the hours in a note in the mean and come back to add them later. I'... | |
| 56896059 by Adamant1 @ 2018-03-05 09:30 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | nereocystis ♦17 | This changeset looks like it was made on top of an older version of data. This results in deleting a few businesses, and getting rid of other changes.I noticed that Dimond Slice restaurant has been deleted.The changeset restored a second version of the Dimond Post OfficeDimond Kitchen wa... |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | Adamant1 | Hhmm. I don't know. Just go over it like its a new edit and add back the things that were deleted. That's usually how I do it. Then add a comment when you save your change that yours is the correct configuration. If it happens again there's also the option of sending the user a messag... | |
| 3 | ~ 7 years ago | Adamant1 | Sometimes people will leave notes saying to remove something from the maps.me app even though the place is still there and there is no way to message them through the app to tell them they are wrong. So sometimes I'll miss it and not double check a place that someone says to get rid of. Things ... | |
| 58755050 by Adamant1 @ 2018-05-07 11:16 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | Thanks for fixing! |
| 55832019 by Adamant1 @ 2018-01-28 15:23 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | 3vivekb ♦61 | Updated a school. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55832019 |
| 51606431 by Adamant1 @ 2017-08-31 09:21 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | Polarbear ♦944 | Hi, landuse=commercial seems strange for the area (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/520252100) around a church (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/513823004), could you consider landuse=religious for the part that belongs to the church? |
| 2 | ~ 8 years ago | Adamant1 | Oh yeah. Good spot. It had been a church historically and its offices now I think. So I was meaning to delete the church tag and I just never got around to it. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. | |
| 55184512 by Adamant1 @ 2018-01-05 11:40 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | oba510 ♦273 | Hi, this seems to be an actual place and not a personal poi (if you look at the history it was imported 10 years ago from the GNIS). I have restored it and converted it to a residential polygon around the condo complex |
| 2 | ~ 8 years ago | Adamant1 | Oh cool. My bad. Thanks for doing that. I'll have to look through the history better next time. | |
| 54748676 by Adamant1 @ 2017-12-19 04:58 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | Hello,Just to let you know, OSM's Data Working Group got a complaint about the duplication in this area (which you may also have seen mentioned in the talk-us post at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2017-December/018216.html ), so thank you for tiding up some of the problems... |
| 54237867 by Adamant1 @ 2017-12-01 14:35 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | Constable ♦1,294 | Hi there, thanks for your help updating the map, please remember to add a brief comment to your future changesets, so that other mappers could quickly understand what you've been editing.http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments#Why_should_I_use_Changeset_Comments.3FThanks! |