OpenStreetMap logo OpenStreetMap

Changeset When Comment
147058636 over 1 year ago

What did they do? I am having a hard time sorting out.

Also, they are an organized editor for Amazon, so there is a higher level of quality expected.

146974346 over 1 year ago

Historic/once-existing railways can be mapped on OHM. But they do not belong on OSM if they don't currently exist.

136767562 over 1 year ago

FYI, your changeset was reverted without duscussion by a different user...

osm.org/changeset/145718903

I agree with you. Based on lifecycle tags, they either shouldn't be mapped or should be tagged as razed since abandoned only applies to locations where the rails still exist, and based on multiple roads and the buildings that now exist where these "abandoned" railways exist, I think it is safe to say there is nothing remaining that resembles a railway in some portions.

145012535 over 1 year ago

What is your source? How did you verify they accept crypto payment?

146387906 over 1 year ago

The removal has already been reversed, and thus no further action is needed here:

osm.org/changeset/146693188

In the future, care will be taken to ensure that payment types remain correct (via phone call to business or in-person surveys). I will not touch crypto payment types personally unless it has been verified personally (in person by me), and will comment on relevant changesets according prior to removal.

I have previously encountered seemingly organized mappers updating the "check_date=*" in an automated fashion without verification that it still (or ever) exists. I will comment and report those organized users going forwards without reverting or touching their tags.

147150199 over 1 year ago

When mapping cartpaths over water, they should be a bridge, or the water should be a tunnel...

147156080 over 1 year ago

Welcome to OSM.

When adding buildings or other rectangular/square type features, "Q" can be used to give them right angles and make the map look good.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/147156080

147100348 over 1 year ago

Please review:
osm.wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=Overlapping%20green/fairway/rough%20polygons%20(see%20graphic%20below)
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/147100348

147100994 over 1 year ago

When mapping golf course features, do not overlap them partially. The smaller one can be completely in the larger one, or they can not overlap at all. Review here for more info:

osm.wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=Overlapping%20green/fairway/rough%20polygons%20(see%20graphic%20below)
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/147100994

127225049 over 1 year ago

You made a couple mistakes:

1) Do not partially overlap landcovers.

2) Do not leave slivers of areas to create "holes".

You should review the following webpage:
osm.wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=the%20building%20itself.-,Common%20mapping%20pitfalls,-Adding%20name%3D*

I have fixed this one time for you. Please do not continue to submit changesets with these errors.

83275556 over 1 year ago

These houses are mapped as literal trash. They are not even close to square, they also don't even closely resemble the shapes of the houses.

126522757 over 1 year ago

You made a couple mistakes:

1) Do not partially overlap landcovers.

2) Do not leave slivers of areas to create "holes".

You should review the following webpage:
osm.wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=the%20building%20itself.-,Common%20mapping%20pitfalls,-Adding%20name%3D*

I have fixed this one time for you. Please do not continue to submit changesets with these errors.

147065222 over 1 year ago

You made a couple mistakes:

1) Do not partially overlap landcovers.

2) Do not leave slivers of areas to create "holes".

You should review the following webpage:
osm.wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=the%20building%20itself.-,Common%20mapping%20pitfalls,-Adding%20name%3D*

146288113 over 1 year ago

Before making further edits on OSM, you shoudl review the following:

osm.wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=the%20building%20itself.-,Common%20mapping%20pitfalls,-Adding%20name%3D*

You made a couple mistakes which I have kindly resolved here:
1) You didn't add the beiges for the cartpath over the water. you just left it as disconnected.
2) You should not name features like tees or fairways. The name=* tag is not used for these features and should be left blank.
3) You partially overlapped landcovers. Areas should not partially overlap.

146603640 over 1 year ago

Before making further edits on OSM, you shoudl review the following:

osm.wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=the%20building%20itself.-,Common%20mapping%20pitfalls,-Adding%20name%3D*

You made a couple mistakes which I have kindly resolved here:
1) You didn't add the beiges for the cartpath over the water. you just left it as disconnected.
2) You should not name features like tees or fairways. The name=* tag is not used for these features and should be left blank.
3) You partially overlapped landcovers. Areas should not partially overlap.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146603640

146603969 over 1 year ago

Before making further edits on OSM, you shoudl review the following:

osm.wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=the%20building%20itself.-,Common%20mapping%20pitfalls,-Adding%20name%3D*

You made a couple mistakes which I have kindly resolved here:
1) You didn't add the beiges for the cartpath over the water. you just left it as disconnected.
2) You should not name features like tees or fairways. The name=* tag is not used for these features and should be left blank.
3) You partially overlapped landcovers. Areas should not partially overlap.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146603969

147032660 over 1 year ago

Trails that are on private property should not be removed... Access tags should be used instead, "access=private".

You can read why here:
osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

I recommend you revert this changeset, restore the trails and then add access tags as appropriate.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/147032660

147035464 over 1 year ago

Couple things:
1) Please do not delete features just to readd them. When possible, existing features should be manipulated. In this way, we can preserve revision history of the feature.
2) Please do not partially overlap landcovers. Fairways and greens should not overlap. I have gone ahead and fixed this just once for you.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/147035464

144295159 over 1 year ago

Please stop deleting trails just because you declare them "private", but they have been confirmed to exist.

Access tags should be used instead of deletion. I have reverted your latest attempt to delete these ways.

146994662 over 1 year ago

Again, this changeset has been reverted. Access tags should be used instead to restrict access, rather than deleting the features all together.

You can read why it won't be deleted here:
osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

osm.org/changeset/146998754