.

I am (at least currently) done with this area and won't mind at all if you have a go at it.
I see how this tagging scheme is inferior to the one you mentioned. Again, thanks for reaching out and happy mapping!

Okay, ich habe es jetzt mal als access=no eingetragen.

Thank you for reaching out! No, I am not currently working on it.
I remember spending quite some time on the wiki debating over which tag to use. There is natural=fell, tundra, heath & scrub. In the end I read the descriptions, compared the images and apparently considered tundra/fell appropriate.
I do see that those are not rendered by OSMCarto, which is unfortunate.
In general, I would still vouch for my decision of tagging (maybe fell is better), instead of scrub/heath. Yet, I certainly won't start re-editing, should you feel compelled to change the tags. I can have a better look at the inagery and wiki later, this might shed some more light on why I arrived at that decision.

Ich finde nicht, dass gesperrte Wege als disused: eingetragen werden sollten, sondern als access=restricted/no. Die Wege an sich sind ja noch in Benutzung von z.B. Naturschützern.

Is it on purpose that you added another Dunragit node(osm.org/node/8222310912) next to the existing one(osm.org/node/732870472)? Can it be deleted?

That is not optimal.

OSM is first ond foremost a database. The map gets generated from it. Just because you don't like how something looks, doesn't mean changing the database is a good idea. Rather make a change request at the renderer of choice. See osm.wiki/Good_practice#Don't_map_for_the_renderer

Ok, thanks for the reply! I have changed it to trail_visibility=no, which is the proper tag but wanted to be sure that was what you meant :)

Update: Habe jetzt auch nix besseres gefunden. Nicht ganz optimal mit der Pferdesache, aber fuers erste ok.

Danke für deine Antwort!
Für 1. würde ich eher einen Punkt machen, der die Dienstleistung abbildet, und den Namen vom Haus zum Betreiber verschoben. Ich kann mal recherchieren, was man da so machen kann und das dann ggf. so eintragen. Privatnamen als Hausnamen sind immer ein wenig schwierig..

Zu 2.:Okay, dann trage ich das spezifischer als Autolackiererei ein.

Same problem here:
1. Your mapped buildings are not rectangular.
2. In many cases, there are no visible buildings where you mapped them. Those will need to be deleted.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145784665

Hello, thank you for contributing to OpenStreetMap!

How do you know that those buildings you mapped are really there? On the satellite imagery, there isn't really much to see.

If they are there, they need to be rectangular (in most cases). In iD, you can achieve this by selecting the buildiing and pressing "Q".
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145784693

Hallo, danke für den Beitrag zu OenStreetMap!

Mir sind zwei kleine Dinge aufgefallen:
1. Bitte keine Namen von Anwohnern eingeben. Solange das Haus also nicht "Heinz Brüggemann" heißt, das nicht als name= eingeben.
2. Die Autolackiererei hast Du als Autoreperatur eingetragen. Ist das so gewollt, oder war das ein Fehler?

Bitte um Antwort, damit ich es ggf. korrigieren kann.

LG
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145871737

Servus, falls Dir Informationen nicht vorliegen, brauchst Du sie nicht mit "?" taggen; einfach ganz weglassen.

Im Zweifelsfall kannst du eine Notiz hinterlassen, entweder als tag "note=Hausnummer ?" oder über die klassischen OSM-Hinweise.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145849642

[I could understand it, if you would be frustrated, but hope that you are not mad at me. If you think that I should have done/communicated something differently, please tell me, so I can try to change it next time.]

Ah, sorry for misunderstanding, my bad.

It depends; you are allowed to link other stuff, e.g. images, websites and so forth. As far as I know, you are not allowed to use external databases as sources for object outlines, names, addresses,... unless they are compatible.

So my understanding would be this:
Linking from OSM to somewhere for additional info (even if it is copyrighted): Ok
Getting opening hours from a business website: Ok
Getting opening hours or names from Google Maps: Not Ok

The way I understood you is, that you got the name (but not the outline?) from Google Earth. Is this correct?

We will see what the DWG will say about this, I emailed them an hour ago, this may take some time. Maybe I'm wrong; in that case, I am very sorry for all the trouble.

If you wish to discuss this further, or ask others of their opinion, we could make a thread on the OSM forum about this.

(I might map some in this area, but will definitely not delete anything related to this, until there is a decision.)

Unfortunately, this is not the case. Wikipedia has an open license, but cannot be used in OSM. See https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/. This applies to WIkimedia Commons images as well. (Unless the authors explicitly waive their rights).

A lot of government data is not compatible as well with OSM (due to various legal issues like attribution, future license changes, etc.).

E.g. in Germany, we have very high resolution imagery, which we are not allowed to use for OSM, even though we are allowed to download them and share them.
A lot of public data is not compatible with the OSM license (the so-called ODbL).

With respect to the topic at hand: I have asked them and the Data Working Group said that they will have to redact that edit from the database, for legal reasons. I have already contacted one of them and will refer this to him.

Afterwards we (I can do it, but if you want to do it, that is fine as well) can add the area again, this thime from proper (i.e. legal) sources.

On that occasion I will ask whether fas.scot is a legal source.

Best regards!

Another question: Have you used Google Maps/Earth in the past for other changes? If yes, tjose would nees to be reviewed as well.

Again, sorry, I hate it as well, but it would be dangerous for OSM to use any copyrighted material.

Well, the problem is: That might not be allowed as well. There is no license mentioned. As long as we are not explicitly allowed to use it, we cannot use it(except for a few cases). Too dangerous to get sued. :'(

I'll have a look at it later.

Here in English: osm.wiki/FAQ#Why_don't_you_just_use_Google_Maps/whoever_for_your_data? and here in Polish: osm.wiki/Pl:Cz%C4%99sto_zadawane_pytania#Dlaczego_nie_u%C5%BCywacie_Google_Maps_lub_czego%C5%9B_w_tym_rodzaju_do_robienia_waszych_map?

Note that the English version explicitly lists Google Earth as well.