Hello!
Portions of T36 don't match what is visible in Bing imagery. Is the Bing imagery out of date?
-Mikel

thanks @rorym

s/proactive import process/proactive import revert process/

Thanks for the reply @woodpeck. I definitely agree we need documented imports, but I'm unclear about the proactive import process, and I'm far from the only one in the community confused by it. A few questions to help get a better picture.

* How are undocumented imports discovered? Are they reported to the DWG? Or is the DWG actively looking for these?

* Once a undocumented import is found, what is the process for communicating with the importer to resolve the problem? What else is done in the process of investigating the import? What is the amount of time given for response from the user? If they are responsive, what is the amount of time given for fixing or documenting properly?

* If the goal is to educate users, what is the reasoning for no public discussion of import reverts? Or even logging and statistics on reverts? Transparency, allowing mappers to know more about what reverts are happening and why, would help greatly to inform the community about the accepted procedure for imports.

Thanks
Mikel

ps How do you personally have so much time to do reverts? :) @woodpeck_repair seems to work day after day on these!

@woodpeck_repair was there any public discussion of reverting this import? I agree that imports should have discussion -- but also think reverts should have discussion too, and a chance for things to be made right.

@Nakaner, you have some things to learn about the OpenStreetMap community. We do not have police, officially sanctioned or self appointed, who monitor imports for "compliance". If there is an issue, then certainly, there is room to be specific and helpful to address any problems. Sorry, but you are neither being specific nor helpful, but rather carrying on a dispute in an area you have no involvement in. If you do have a dispute with @Rps333, I suggest you review our community dispute management guidelines for ideas on how to resolve this in a cooperative manner osm.wiki/Data_working_group/Disputes.

Whatever the situation on the map, whomever is in a conversation, saying things like "blind and stupid as a bot" is completely uncalled for.

I have to assume, you wouldn't say something like that to someone's face. Take the same kind of basic courtesy from real life to interactions online. We are all still people here, working together on the map, and respect is paramount.

> I won't wait.

This is not OK.

OSM only works with cooperation and respect. We find ways to help support each others work and make the map better. The work of this changeset is led by active mappers in an active community, who are ready to discuss and work on their data. Certainly there can be improvements, and we can work together to get there.

There are very few situations where a unilateral and immediate revert is justified (like active vandalism), and possibly zero where such an action would be taken without consulting the DWG, and especially where the mapper is willing to actively engage in discussion of the issue.

Let's figure out what conversations we need to have and guidance we can put in place, so that our community remains a welcoming and cooperative place for making the best map in the entire world.

-Mikel

Hi Maureen
Many of the "brownfield" features mapped around Bamba are probably not appropriate for OpenStreetMap. They appear to be "service areas" for various things like schools and water points. Is that right? Let's talk soon about how we can clean this data up, so that OSM accurate shows only physical features in these areas.
-Mikel

Hey there! Just fixed the name --- pretty sure it is "The Dew Drop Inn"

My role in the import was to make some repairs to another user's import. My understanding is that they used "living_street" in cases of unpaved residential roads, because there was a great amount of activity on these roads, and therefore resembled living streets in the EU. There is no legal definition of living street in Nigeria. At the time of the import, I didn't totally agree with the classification, but didn't think it important.

Given the question on the classification, I think it's best to improve this, and will do so, by changing classification to residential road.

hello. you called this a "test update" ... is it a test, or a real feature? looking at the satellite imagery, don't see a building there.

great to see hindi @pratikyadav. but ukranian name is missing, ask @andygol

great detail with trees. but probably more appropriate to tag with species rather than name

way to be productive with jetlag! :airplane: :zzzz:

testing comments

🏠

:city_sunset:

wow, that is some thorough parking space mapping! if you're going to map parking spots that thoroughly, looks more proper to use amenity=parking_space osm.wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dparking_space

OSM is a live database, and you should not enter "test" data. If this is a real feature, it should be tagged appropriately; otherwise, deleted.