OSM changeset discussions of niskumal

Changeset	#	Tmstmp UTC	Contributor	Comment
133069997 by niskumal @ 2023-02-27 04:48	1	2023-02-27 06:56	map per ♦1,314	Hello niskumal, these roads aren't service roads but tracks. Please don't do automated edits that change all highway=road to highway=service (see (1)). (Undiscussed automated edits are not appreciated in OSM) Although the road classification of course isn't ideal as it describe...
	2	2023-02-28 09:16	silakshm ♦21	Hi, We appreciate you reviewing the changeset and alerting us to this. The editor has accidentally made an incorrect edit . I have reverted the edits in the changeset #133115812 and will ensure that such errors do not flow from our end. We appreciate your feedback. Regards, silakshm
	3	2023-02-28 10:52	map per ♦1,314	Hello silakshm, You didn't revert the changeset. You just deleted the highways which is not a good solution. These roads exist. I would suggest to re-add them and and change the highway value to track (or road if you prefer to do a clean revert of the Amazon edits and feel uncomfortable ed...
	4	2023-02-28 11:06	silakshm ♦21	Hi, Thank you for your suggestion. Upon performing the necessary checks we see that there is no physical road existing in ground reality based on the available aerial views. The pavement is obscured by vegetation in all the available imageries. Hence I have deleted the segments. If you have ...
	5	2023-02-28 12:40	map per ♦1,314	I restored the deleted ways
	6	2023-02-28 20:54	map per ♦1,314	Hello silakshm, There are several similar problems and beginner's mistakes in other changesets of niskumal and yadavzhi. I would therefore suggest that you or some amazon reviewer should review all of their recent changesets. I don't know the changeset number any more, but I saw e.g....
	7	2023-03-01 10:26	silakshm ♦21	Hi, Thank you for your feedback. There appears to be a knowledge gap with the editor which resulted in this error. Let us assure you that very edit made by us on OSM is reviewed by our internal team for quality assurance. To ensure that we identify and correct any errors that may have occu...
	8	2023-03-09 20:37	map per ♦1,314	Hello silakshm, what's the current status of this? Are you finished with the review or can you give an estimate how long it wil probably take? Have you found and fixed the service roads entirely surrounded by tracks? Thanks and best regards map per
	9	2023-03-15 12:33	deepikja ♦58	Hi, We apologize for the errors created by these two editors which have flown into OSM due to technical issues. We assure you that we will fix all the service roads entirely surrounded by tracks and restore the previous edits based on latest available imageries. We are currently re-evaluating eve...
	10	2023-03-15 23:01	map per ♦1,314	Great, thanks!
	11	2023-03-22 12:46	map per ♦1,314	Could you please share the results of your evaluation with me. Which changesets were fixed by you? The service roads in the forrest, entirely surrounded by tracks weren't fixed yet.
	12	2023-04-02 17:32	deepikja ♦58	Hi Skyper, We have audited the changesets created by niskumal and yadavzhi, identified majority of the errors created by them and reverted their edits. To identify the errors which could have flown into OSM basis we could retrain the team on the etiquettes to be followed while editing, we are co...
133072008 by niskumal @ 2023-02-27 06:12	1	2023-02-27 07:00	map per ♦1,314	Hello niskumal, why did you delete service=busway on this road? It's not a standard value but it makes sense so please don't do automated edits that delete rare service values (see (1)). (Undiscussed automated edits are not appreciated in OSM) Best regards map per (1) https://wik...
	2	2023-02-27 10:32	deepikja ♦58	Hi, Thank you for writing us. In accordance with the recommendations listed in the OSM wiki, the editor removed service=busway tagging on the segment. The wiki states that we don't have the tag service=busway. The attribute bus=yes has already been tagged on the road indicating the road to be...
	3	2023-02-27 14:41	map per ♦1,314	Hello Deepikja, Thanks for the quick response. In OSM there are no wrong or forbidden values. So anyone can come up with a new service=* value if they don't find an established one. See (2) for more on that. Its of course necessary for a consistent map to agree on common values and docu...
	4	2023-03-14 08:15	deepikja ♦58	Hi, Thank you for providing your insights on the usage of service=* tags. We will incorporate this in our internal centralized wiki to ensure that going forward such edits do not flow from our end. Regards, Deepikja
133070711 by niskumal @ 2023-02-27 05:14	1	2023-02-27 18:26	Bienson ♦323	Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/133099017
	2	2023-02-28 06:23	silakshm ♦21	Hi, We appreciate you making the necessary corrections and alerting us about this. The editor has accidentally deleted the tags. To prevent such mistakes in the future, we have given the editor strict feedback. Regards, silakshm
133071027 by niskumal @ 2023-02-27 05:29	1	2023-02-27 07:06	map per ♦1,314	Hello niskumal, from the aerial imagery one can easily tell that this footway is way to narrow to be a service road. Why did you change the classification form path to service? Best regards map per
	2	2023-02-27 10:12	deepikja ♦58	Hi, We appreciate you alerting us about this. I went back and corrected the editor's honest error using the aerial images. To prevent such mistakes in the future, we have given the editor strict feedback. Regards, Deepika
133070912 by niskumal @ 2023-02-27 05:23	1	2023-02-27 07:09	map per ♦1,314	Are you kidding me? This clearly isn't a service road either Best regards map per
	2	2023-02-27 10:03	deepikja ♦58	Hi, Thank You for highlighting the issue. This is an honest mistake made by the editor. I have reverted the edit basis the ground reality classified the segment as a path. We have provided the feedback to the editor to avoid such mistakes in future. Regards, Deepikja