These building outlines do not match the imagery at all. Please do not just add rectangular buildings just so that the map looks filled in, it gives a false impression of quality.

Er hoeft geen onderscheid gemaakt te worden. landuse=military geeft simpelweg aan dat dit gebied voor military doeleinden word gebruikt. gebruikt word, of dit nou op land of water is.

Als jij hier wat aan wil doen dan stel ik voor dat je een forumpost maakt.

Oops, die changeset description had een comment moeten zijn bij de teruggedraaide changesets.

Restored landuse=military

osm.org/changeset/157366637

Restored landuse=military

osm.org/changeset/157366637

OSM is niet de locatie om privé informatie op te zetten. Jou naam hoort niet thuis op de kaart. Ook heb ik de zeecontainers verwijderd. Dit zijn geen huizen en dit zijn tijdelijke objecten en horen dus niet thuis op de kaart

Hi, when attempting to fix OSM data, please make sure that what you're fixing actually makes sense. In this case temporary shipping containers should not be mapped at all, so this object should have been deleted instead.

Sincerely,
Taya

Hi, I have reverted this changeset. The quarry landuse is reserved for where the actual digging takes place, something that is already tagged (if somewhat outdated) with seperate landuse=quarry for this mine operation

osm.org/changeset/155537505

Hello CaptainLama,

Thanks for your additions. I however would like to ask you to not give objects descriptive names. we use tags to describe objects, the name is purely reserved for actual names.

Sincerely,
Taya

Over 25% of bays are mapped as areas, so that statement is wrong. Just to give you 2 examples in Australia alone: osm.org/relation/9425816
osm.org/relation/9426166

Its not really appreciated that you immediatly reverted this entire changeset. This is a simple broken relation fix that you could have also either fixed yourself or alerted me about.

Yes

Hey, I noticed that someone reverted a bunch of deleted POI's. All of those POI's were deleted by you due to vandalism. Most of those POI's completely changed (ex: a fake town was restored and turned in to a fitness centre). Not sure whats going on here, but you might want to look in to that.
osm.org/changeset/154790585

Hello, I have reverted this changeset. private properties can be mapped on OSM with no issues. See this wiki page for more information: osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

The best way to indicate that a road is private is to add access=private. The mass removal of features that are present on the ground is not acceptable.

osm.org/changeset/154772197

Hello, I have reverted this changeset. private properties can be mapped on OSM with no issues. See this wiki page for more information: osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

The best way to indicate that a road is private is to add access=private. The mass removal of features that are present on the ground is not acceptable.

osm.org/changeset/154772197

Hello, I have reverted this changeset. private properties can be mapped on OSM with no issues. See this wiki page for more information: osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

The best way to indicate that a road is private is to add access=private. The mass removal of features that are present on the ground is not acceptable.

osm.org/changeset/154772149

Hello, I have reverted this changeset. private properties can be mapped on OSM with no issues. See this wiki page for more information: osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

The best way to indicate that a road is private is to add access=private. The mass removal of features that are present on the ground is not acceptable.

osm.org/changeset/154772149

Hello, I have reverted this changeset. private properties can be mapped on OSM with no issues. See this wiki page for more information: osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

The best way to indicate that a road is private is to add access=private. The mass removal of features that are present on the ground is not acceptable.

osm.org/changeset/154772149

Hello, I have reverted this changeset. private properties can be mapped on OSM with no issues. See this wiki page for more information: osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

The best way to indicate that a road is private is to add access=private. The mass removal of features that are present on the ground is not acceptable.

osm.org/changeset/154772149

Hello, I have reverted this changeset. private properties can be mapped on OSM with no issues. See this wiki page for more information: osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

The best way to indicate that a road is private is to add access=private. The mass removal of features that are present on the ground is not acceptable.

osm.org/changeset/154772149