OpenStreetMap logo OpenStreetMap

Changeset When Comment
110881028 almost 4 years ago

Hi, thank you for helping to improve OSM. There are a few issues with your edits, though. Your use of the community and community:type tags is not really in line with the description of that tags, besides that you misspelled "lehrerleut" (missing the "r"). I suggest to discuss your intentions on the osm.wiki/Talk:Key:community discussion page to find a tagging that fits your intention better, before continuing with the edits.
Greetings,
Wolfgang

78345231 over 5 years ago

Thanks for your quick answer. I'm also just armchair mapping in the area, but I could not find any indication for passenger traffic on that line, so I'm going to retag it as a freigt station again.

78345231 over 5 years ago

Hi, I noticed that you added a public_transport=station tag to the BNSF station in Forsyth. AFAIK this tag should be only used for stations with passenger traffic, and I thought Forsyth was a freight-only station. I might be wrong though. Could you enlighten me, please?
Greetings from Germany,
Wolfgang

29638545 over 5 years ago

Hi,
I'm currently updating the map for Forsyth, MT, and I can't find any information on "Perry park" that you added in this changeset. At least the southern part of it appears to be a residence now. Do you happen to remember where this park came from?

8406037 almost 6 years ago

I have not the slightest idea. Must have been a mistake, obviously. If you come across one of these tags, please feel free to remove them.

62801605 over 6 years ago

Hi, just noticed that you actually moved the embassy tags from house nr. 4 to nr. 13. As the embassy website gives the address as house nr. 4, and shows a photo that shows the building at nr. 4, I assume this might be an error. Do you remember why you moved the tags?

63050667 over 6 years ago

Hi, I noticed you removed most of the tags referring to the Embassy of Sierra Leone from this building. Has it moved, closed or was this a mistake?

44653396 over 8 years ago

I'm not sure about the urban part of the route, secondary might be justified here. The rural part is just fine as tertiary IMHO, everything else in that area would be unclassified or track anyway.
Regarding the ref, I always use MT XXX on the ways. All three digit numbers except MT 100 and MT 200 are secondary state highways, so this should be sufficient. As soon as we get a renderer using shields, it will be drawn based on the network tag in the route relation, so then the ref tag on the ways will become less important. Unfortunately it looks like it could still be quite some time until we are there.
Before I forget: Thanks for working on Montana highways! If you like, please check osm.wiki/Montana/Highways for the current state of things.

44653396 over 8 years ago

Hi, I noticed that you changed highway 302 from tertiary to primary and secondary. Are you sure this should be mapped as the most important road class after Interstate? I'm not so sure about that. I also have some doubts on using "MT S-302" as a ref on the way. Highway shields use only the number and the fact it's a secondary state highway is shown by using an arrowpoint shield instead of the square shields used for (primary) state highways. You can see a sample shield on osm.wiki/Tag:network%3DUS:MT:secondary

20851933 over 9 years ago

Thanks, that's really cool stuff!

20851933 over 9 years ago

Hi,

you added a feature here as railway that looks a lot like it is really a high pressure water pipeline feeding a power turbine. Could you have a look at it again?
Thanks,
Wolfgang

31969613 over 9 years ago

Hi,
I just came upon way 5821562, a powerline that you edited in this changeset. AFAICS you converted the nodes to power=tower and removed the tiger:reviewed=no. Unfortunately the nodes are not in the position of the power poles, and the line is only a raw approximation, at least in the Two Dot area where I looked. Maybe you reviewed only part of the line and did not notice that it extended a lot further? Please have a look at it again.

29930678 about 10 years ago

Hi, you merged names from a POI to this islet recently. My question is: are you sure this island actually exists? On current Bing imagery (2014-08-20) it is not visible; older Mapbox imagery shows something that COULD be an island but to me looks more like a ship grounded on a sandbar.

27364051 about 10 years ago

Hi Richard, you added way 316576728 as abandoned railway in this changeset. Looking at USGS Topo Maps gives the impression that this is actually an abandoned course of Montana highway 200, and the highway has now been rerouted over the former railway bed. Please have a look.