Hi there, i'ts best to edit existing data, not delete it and replace it, as we lose the history attached to that object.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164800107

Translated via libretranslate.com

嗨,乐尼可

数据工作组的安德鲁

请解释你为什么从一个分站删除细节(显示在列出的图像上被使用)并将其设定为土地利用=草?

敬请
安德鲁·韦尔奇,OSMF 数据工作组

Hi LokNeko,

Andrew from the Data Working Group here,

Could you please explain why you removed details from a water plant that shows as such on the imagery you claim to have used?

Kind regards,
Andrew Welch, OSMF Data Working Group

Translated via libretranslate.com

嗨,乐尼可

数据工作组的安德鲁

请解释你为什么从一个分站删除细节(显示在列出的图像上被使用)并将其设定为土地利用=草?

敬请
安德鲁·韦尔奇,OSMF 数据工作组

Hi LokNeko,

Andrew from the Data Working Group here,

Could you please explain why you removed details from a substation (that shows on the imagery listed as being used) and set it to be landuse=grass instead?

Kind regards,
Andrew Welch, OSMF Data Working Group

Reverted by DWG

osm.org/changeset/164789826

Please see osm.org/user_blocks/17536

Hi, is this canal signposted as "Irrigation", it seems like a descriptive name, which shouldn't be in the name tag.

Hi yliguenes,

Andrew from the Data Working Group here, are you able to share the reason for the deletions here, as some of the natural=wood ways do appear as dense tree areas from aerial imagery.

I'll also add, can you please make sure your changesets have a comment on them describing them?

Kind regards,
Andrew Welch, OSMF Data Working Group

Hi tpatte02,

I do have to agree with some of Allison P's last message, it's completely fair to be upset when community members try to assist (especially with something as frowned upon as testing on the live map) and then ignoring/arguing until the DWG has stepped in, especially considering some of your original responses. Please leave it be, and in future, engage constructively when someone comments on your changesets.

Allison, please keep your comments civil. There's nothing making it obvious their comments are from ChatGPT, and they've apologised for the problematic edits. I can understand your frustration, as well as theirs, but continuing like this does nothing to help the situation.

If you have concerns on any of their future changesets, please raise it with them politely, or report it to the DWG if required.

Thanks for understanding.

The messages from others may seem a bit heated, but that does tend to come from recurring issues with users of the same software you are using. It's a pain point for a number of mappers.

I'd definitely encourage trying to push the developers of the software you use to correct it to handle golf courses as they are meant to be mapped, or to be able to take a .osm file in like other software can (i.e. Farming Simulator map makers), that way you can download an area in JOSM, make the changes you require, and save those changes locally for the software to use, instead of uploading to OSM itself.

Hi tpatte02,

Andrew from the Data Working Group here, what other mappers are telling you in this and other changesets is correct, in that both your edits done to suit a particular data consumer are incorrect, and that data should not be uploaded into the live database as a test.

The mappers commenting on your changesets are just trying to do the right thing and ensure OpenStreetMap data is correct.

Please stop any invalid edits or test edits, and if the third party data consumer you use isn't able to understand how things are mapped when done correctly, they will need to adjust this on their end.

Kind regards,
Andrew Welch, on behalf of the OSMF Data Working Group.

I've reverted this changeset for you, so it's all been removed now.

Changeset reverted at request of mapper

osm.org/changeset/164708443

Hi there,

If you're editing as part of an organisation, you'll need to be aware of the Organised Editing Guidelines [1].

With the edits themselves, I'd start by making sure you've pulled down what already exists in OSM, edit those, and then upload it. If you just add data to a blank JOSM workspace and upload it, it will only ever add new data, not replace any existing data.

[1] osm.wiki/Organised_Editing/Guidelines

Not a problem, thanks for that!

Hi cashwin111,

Usually on OSM we prefer to keep the histoy of data, so the best way to do this would be to upload the GPX files into an editor (iD and JOSM both definitely support this) and then use those to help you adjust the existing data.

Currently all the data you've uploaded has some across with a lot of invalid tags, so I'd definitely recommend those being removed and adjusting the existing data after that.

Hi, Andrew from the DWG here,

It looks like you were trying to upload some GPX traces into OSM as traces, but you’ve actually uploaded them directly into the map.

Are these meant to be added directly, and if so, can you please tag them correctly?

If not, let me know if you need a hand removing them.

Thanks,
Andrew Welch
OSMF Data Working Group

Hey, are those house numbers on Muirkirk Street in Jamestown correct? The ordering is 22, 16, 108 which doesn't make sense.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164673592