See also
- https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10219277312795705
- https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=2119242708360519

See also
https://www.geograph.ie/photo/5926855

See also (use for reference only!);
https://www.facebook.com/monaleayoga/photos/a.1285801351479561/3239998332726510/

Just try searching for a bit. Anyhow, could you please keep changeset comments related to the changeset? The rest can be discussed in DM.

See also Já 360° götusýn:
https://ja.is/kort/?x=444904&y=368193&nz=14.96&ja360=1&jh=190.0
( via osm.wiki/Iceland#Free_data_sources )

See also this document for an image of the former milk churn stand;
https://www.meath.ie/system/files/media/file-uploads/2019-05/Nobber%20%28Adopted%2024th%20July%2009%29.pdf

Hey Anne,

There is good aerial and street level imagery available here; the latter clearly shows a low, triangular stand rather than a high, square one. As such, I've replaced the wikimedia link (2012!) with a Mapillary link. See
osm.org/changeset/135233612

Regards,

Daniel

Hey ftrebien,

Please explicitly mention any sources you are using in the changeset source field when saving your changes. Sources like "more recent maps" and "various photos" are unclear and as such not verifiable.
osm.wiki/Verifiability

Note, sources may or may not be compatible with the license OpenStreetMap is using; aka we may or may not be able to use the data in OpenStreetMap. See
osm.wiki/Import/ODbL_Compatibility

As noted on the OSM Wiki, not all data sources listed there are known to be compatible.
osm.wiki/Antarctica/Data_Sources

- Data sources available in the (Rap)iD or JOSM editors by default in their imagery or data menu are allowed to be used for mapping in OSM.
- Licensing for Wikimedia Commons or similar imagery may vary.
- Google Maps / Google Streetview / similar proprietary services are copyright. See
osm.wiki/Google
- Facts in news articles may be used, though with caution.

Note, I can't give legal advice nor guarantee anything is ok to use.

If you are unsure if you are using compatible sources, please contact the Licensing Working Group.
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licensing_Working_Group

If you are using incompatible sources, please contact the Data Working Group to have it reverted.
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Data_Working_Group

This message is just for your information. I assume you are using compatible sources.

I also invite you to check out the (global) contact channels if you haven't yet.
osm.wiki/Contact_channels

Regards,

Daniel

Hey Tilia_J,

Kijk wanneer je tijd hebt even;

Is dit een beschrijving, of een echte naam? ('Rhederoordse spreng')
- osm.org/way/59177326
- osm.org/way/59176799
- osm.org/way/59176848
-beschrijving met "description" of relatie ipv "name", echte "name" met eerste letters een hoofdletter natuurlijk-
Dit verschilt van de bijbehorende lijn.

Groet,

Daniel

Hey Tilia_J,

Kijk wanneer je tijd hebt even;

Is dit een beschrijving, of een echte naam? ('oude spreng')
osm.org/way/781380189 en bijbehorende relatie.
-beschrijving met "description" of relatie ipv "name", echte "name" met eerste letters een hoofdletter natuurlijk-
De andere weg in de relatie heeft overigens nog geen naam of beschrijving.

Groet,

Daniel

Nvm, I've changed my mind, let's keep to description only.

I assume it was built as memorial. Victor might know a good way to tag the physical and commemorated subjects independently here. Since I have a moment, I'll send them a PM.

Regards,

Daniel

Newer Geograph images do not seem to be imported to Wikimedia Commons.
Since this is true for quite a number of them, I would personally like to refrain from cluttering OSM with these external links.
Any Commons links still missing can be easily added later.

Regards,

Daniel

*Wikimedia Commons for reference

Thanks for clarifying :-)

Where exactly is it located? Couldn't find it on Mapillary yet. There may be a route marker to the east/right;
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=725609708993654&focus=photo

I understand your reaction. I'm sorry if it comes across as one.
I'm not too worried about it. It's unlikely they want to do map much harm. With new mappers it can be discussed eventually if needed. They are likely to get a welcome message from us and learn about this regardless. Corporate mappers should adjust to the organized editing guidelines, and it can take a bit before they cooperate. For more experienced mappers -not to be all personal about it-, it'd be good courtesy towards fellow mappers. It makes it easier to verify other mappers' changes and discuss their edits.
osm.wiki/Verifiability

I'm aware the changes you are doing are not changing much, they're more reverting incorrect changes. Still, it'd only be reasonable to use the local sources which the local community has agreed upon for best practice.

I hope this helps to clarify things.

This is a friendly notice for your own information. What you do with it is up to you. I do not intend to threaten any user with DWG action. However, if you make any inappropriate changes, it may result in such action.
Whether other people do this or not does not matter for this.

Please use proper sources in future edits. See also osm.wiki/Good_practice#Do_not_trace_from_outdated_imagery

You are using an outdated aerial imagery layer for this area. You should use the recommended aerial imagery layers which I mentioned above.

I haven't used JOSM in a long time. If you need any help with using these layers in JOSM, try asking on the forums.

Hey Spaghetti Monster,

Please use sources appropriate for the area you are mapping and specify them actively when saving your edits.

For The Netherlands, use Esri and PDOK 8cm aerial. These should be readily available in JOSM. You can find other data sources, like the AHN (LIDAR height model), on the forums:
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/de-beste-imagery-layers-om-nl-osm-te-mappen-met-josm/85393

If you need any help, comment on said thread, or start a new one.

Any inappropriate changes, being low accuracy or made using outdated sources, may be reverted by other mappers. If you continue to map inappropriately, the Data Working Group may have to step in. You are likely already aware of this.

Regards,

Daniel