Hi boulderix, danke für deine Beiträge. Das von dir ergänzte "Endorfer Sporthaus" ist bereits in OSM vorhanden und befindet in der Wasserburger 1, nicht in Nr. 3.

Das beste und aktuellste Luftbild für Bayern ist übrigens (Bavaria 80 cm), du kannst es in "Go Map!" im Display-Menü auswählen (icon unten rechts in der Kartenansicht).

Danke
geow

Erledigt, siehe osm.org/node/6279224467

@ThomasMel, wir würden uns freuen, wenn du diese Prinzipien bei deinen bisherigen und künftigen Ergänzungen berücksichtigen würdest.

Danke
geow

Wird das gesamte Gebäude von Xantara genutzt? Falls nein, bitte die Firma als node eintragen, z.B. mit office=company, Namen bitte nicht in Versalien.
Und den description-tag bitte sinnvoll kürzen, nicht für Werbung missbrauchen.
Danke!

All the above mentioned problems should be addressed and solved before you attempt another import; please discuss on the imports mailing list.

All the above mentioned problems should be addressed and solved before you attempt another import; please discuss on the imports mailing list.

All the above mentioned problems should be addressed and solved before you attempt another import; please discuss on the imports mailing list.

All the above mentioned problems should be addressed and solved before you attempt another import; please discuss on the imports mailing list.

This changeset has been reverted in changeset #67055692 where the comment is:
Revert of place node import due to unclear license, lack of discussion, missing proper classification and poor positional accuracy.

This changeset has been reverted in changeset #67055617 where the comment is:
Revert of place node import due to unclear license, lack of discussion, missing proper classification and poor positional accuracy.

This changeset has been reverted in changeset #67038012 where the comment is: Revert of place node import due to unclear license, lack of discussion, missing proper classification (place=islet) and poor positional accuracy.

This changeset was reverted in changeset #66974438
where the comment is:
Revert of place node import due to unclear license, lack of discussion, missing proper classification and poor positional accuracy.

Namaste amritkarma, I took a closer look at the data and found that the locations and the name-tags of the nodes originated from this source: https://data.humdata.org/dataset/settlements-in-nepal

The license of the data seems to be not compatible with the OpenStreetMap Open Database License, as the terms of use require „Compilation or creation of derivative works from these Materials is subject to the inclusion of credit to the source of the Materials used (which may or may not be OCHA)“:
https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/e … /terms-use

Due to the unclear license, the lack of discussion and the missing proper classification of the place sites - if you agree - I would be in favor of reverting this CS.

Thanks
geow

Servus, uch bin ja ein Freund sparsamer Benamung, aber der Name steht so auf der Webseite und am Eingang, name:en lt. Webseite:
https://www.wasserburg.de/de/tourismus-freizeit/service-infos/gaeste-information/

Habe die Namensquelle mal ergänzt.

Gruß
Klaus

Thanks Prabesh, this CS was reverted in osm.org/changeset/66882442

Regards
geow

Hi prabesh, this looks like an import, was it discussed before the execution, as the guidelines osm.wiki/Import/Guidelines require?

I took a closer look at the data and found out that the location of the nodes originated from this source: https://data.humdata.org/dataset/settlements-in-nepal

The license of the data seems to be not compatible with the OpenStreetMap Open Database License, as the terms of use require „Compilation or creation of derivative works from these Materials is subject to the inclusion of credit to the source of the Materials used (which may or may not be OCHA)“:
https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/e … /terms-use

In addition to the unclear license and the lack of discussion these nodes - due to missing classification of the sites - do not contribute any meaningful info to our database,

If you agree, I would like to revert this CS.

Thanks
geow

Right, but you've only changed town -> village. Apart from the unclear data source/license, due to lacking names this is not a meaningful contribution to the database and should be removed. Could you do that, please?

Regards
geow

Namaste amritkarma, this looks like an import, was it discussed before the execution, as the guidelines osm.wiki/Import/Guidelines require?
Where does this data come from? May we use it in accordance with licensing rules?

...and please use meaningful changeset comments, see osm.wiki/Good_practice#Good_changeset_comments

"Mapping trees" is clearly incorrect.

Thanks
geow

Namaste amritkarma, this looks like an import, was it discussed before the execution, as the guidelines osm.wiki/Import/Guidelines require?
Where does this data come from? May we use it in accordance with licensing rules?

...and please use meaningful changeset comments, see osm.wiki/Good_practice#Good_changeset_comments

"Mapping trees" is clearly incorrect.

Thanks
geow

Namaste amritkarma, this looks like an import, was it discussed before the execution, as the guidelines osm.wiki/Import/Guidelines require?
Where does this data come from? May we use it in accordance with licensing rules?

...and please use meaningful changeset comments, see osm.wiki/Good_practice#Good_changeset_comments

"Mapping trees" is clearly incorrect.

Thanks
geow

...and please use meaningful change set comments, see osm.wiki/Good_practice#Good_changeset_comments

"#hotosm-project-5496 #osm_in #2018IndiaFloods" is clearly incorrect.