Here is a nearby example of how to add large wetland areas. osm.org/relation/12117017/history#map=13/25.2282/-81.0419

Hi there. The wetland in this changeset covers a large area that is not totally wetland. Did you intend to create such a massive water boundary? It would be good to split the wetland at places where there are big holes or openings, such as around ponds and such. If you intend to do this but it is still a work in progress, please let us know. You could avoid any issue by writing more detailed, unique changeset comments too.

Thanks,

Elliott
OSMF Data Working Group

Hi there, it looks like you are doing some boundary mapping or editing. Could you be clearer in your changeset descriptions? Try to make every comment unique, e.g., what detailed areas are you adding? I don't see any adds here, only updates.

osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Please respond to confirm receipt.

-- Elliott
OSMF Data Working Group

OSM is not for testing

Mass deletion

Amazing!

Fixed the park, trees in the park, and the parking lot to the standard of how these sorts of things should be mapped. Please review. osm.org/changeset/117742217

Signed,

– Elliott Plack
OSM Foundation
Data Working Group

CarniLvr79, you have been blocked for your comments and practices, please review: osm.org/user_blocks/5709 Please refrain from 'cutting out' things with the tree cover.

Spaghetti Monster, you have already admitted that the hasty revert should have been prefaced by a comment, so the following is somewhat redundant. As a matter of procedure, please reach out via changeset comment to the mapper. The only exception is for matters of unmistakable vandalism, e.g., adding something fake to the map (in which case please also report the user via their profile). When dealing with things that are somewhat subjective, best to discuss first.

Hi there, thanks for fixing this! I am in the process of rolling back the rest of the vandalism here.

--
Elliott Plack
OSM Foundation
Data Working Group

Blocked osm.org/user_blocks/5680

Anything else to revert for this one?

Thank you. I am working on the golf mapper issue with the Data Working Group. I saw your comment on the lewis22derek one where he'd changed some things at Patterson Park. I am working backwards through the edits to revert. Please let me know if I can be of assistance, as I appreciate your work as well!

A few of us over at OSMUS Slack in the #golf channel updated the wiki with some of these issues: osm.wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#Common_mapping_pitfalls

--
Elliott Plack
OSM Foundation
Data Working Group

Hey there, thanks for the work updating the new sections of the OEC connector. The Friends and DNR are working on improving OSM to mirror these important projects!

On the data side, the use of both proposed=yes and the description in parentheses is discouraged in favor of the "lifecycle prefix" style of tagging. You may see this elsewhere in the park where a closed trail becomes closed:highway=path. These do not show up in the rendered map but are visible in the data to let mappers know not to add them.

I have not visited the connector in some months, so you likely have better on-the-ground experience here, but if parts of the connector are merely flagged and not walkable other than bushwhacking, I would not add them as paths just yet. Read about the prefix tags here: osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix

Also, for the parentheses, check out osm.wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions as those descriptors should be put in descriptions.

This edit broke the Chesapeake Bay

Hi there, I believe the discussion is now resolved (see my late comment) so you can resume your work in this area. Zlonewolf already addressed this partly in osm.org/changeset/116862075.

-- Elliott Plack
OSM Foundation
Data Working Group

Adamant, Elliott from the DWG here. The only one we see in the wrong here is you, for asserting authority over an area where you have none and for using this changeset discussion as a platform. Please cease and desist from further discussion, causing grief to your fellow mappers, and this line of questioning. The OSM community is fluid across a plethora of mediums, many of which are far better for this sort of discussion. Please take this conversation elsewhere. In my own experience there are many, many more mappers that are in agreement on the classification structure than those that care to respond on the wiki or the talk lists. Please take this conversation elsewhere. osm.org/user_blocks/5637

Thanks for fixing the missing link in the network!

FYI, the pickleball court preset has now been added to ID.

thanks for checking that out!