Hello wpedmonson, I have removed the "description" again because it (1) contains non-factual advertising text, (2) is incomplete, and (3) might very well violate copyright (since you say you took it from the hotel web site).

Comment cock-up. Should have been: "remove advertising (spammy description)".

unvollst. Changeset-Kommentar: zusätzlich auch 2 Briefkästen gelöscht, die zu einem neuen zusammengelegt wurden.

Dear radek-drlicka, could you please clarify in how far you applied "user knowledge" (your source tag) to make these edits. Is it possible that instead of applying "user knowledge", you simply went to each Wikipedia page and copied the Wikidata link that was given on the page?

Jonathan, I am sorry but I will have to remove this un-discussed and badly tagged import. Please check with the "imports" mailing list to get support in doing this right.

My changes are really just to individual objects so they are immediately obvious from the object history or from the deep diff tool here http://osm.mapki.com/history/node.php?id=4144996689. I have about 1000 more to go, the overwhelming majority are in the US, maybe I can split them out and separate continents. I agree that the node you have singled out is a corner case - most descriptions I delete are pure and outright advertising ("we provide the best of this and that" etc.) whereas in this particular case it was just a list of services provided and not a slogan. Also while most descriptions I remove bear clear signs of having been added by SEO companies, this one was likely added by the owners themselves. I'll reinstate that one. I have generally removed spammy descriptions even if they bore some valuable information because I thought it is not our job at OSM to improve what SEO companies cannot be bothered to do right!

Hi, "...offers the latest in proven medical and surgical care" is clear advertising speak that has no place in OSM. Also, the node had no amentity/office/craft or tag like that, so if it had been added to make the practice findable on OSM, it didn't even do that (or at least not in the way we map things). Also, the "Suite" with a capital S together with the fact that it's always one new user account adding just one new business, is a clear hallmark of a certain SEO company. These people are paid to add businesses to the map, they flood us with advertising and don't even add POIs right. Rest assured, if this same POI had been used by a mapper who looked anything like a normal mapper and not a one-POI SEO company, I would have sent them a changeset comment with suggestions for improvements instead. But with these SEO spammers, that's totally useless.

SafwatHalaby, the line I have drawn is: If the self-interest mapper can at *least* be bothered to find out the proper OSM tag to describe their business, then I will only remove the spammy "description" and leave the rest in place. There are quite a few of that sort here. If, however, the spammer has *only* specified their web address, telephone number, name, and description (and maybe when they're open and what credit cards they take), but *not* spent the time to find out whether they are shop=cosmetics or craft=plumber or office=lawyer, then I will remove the data. Yes, looking at the description tag and name will often give me, as an experienced OSMer, an idea of what the right tag would have been; but in most of these cases we are not dealing with a self-interest person but with a paid spamming company, and I really don't see why I should spend my free time to help them improve their quality!

I have started carefully removing the spam objects here osm.org/changeset/53216381 : Where a spammy description and contact information were added to a building but there was no shop/office/amenity tag (just name/phone/payment methods etc), I reduced the object to a mere building and did NOT help the spammers by finding the right tags for the business.
Where a spammy description was added to a properly tagged business, I removed the spammy description only. Where a spammy description and address were added to a node or way but the address did not add any info because another nearby object already had that address, I d
eleted the whole thing. I also deleted the object where it was clear from aerial imagery that the node had not been properly placed (middle of road etc).

The changeset contains a ton of nodes that are meaningless in OSM because they lack a POI type, but that carry advertising messages like this one: osm.org/way/529863394 - or look at the way I pointed to in my comment above (a highway with a spammy description added), or click on any of the nodes and you're likely to see description tags of "XX offers dental care services from general dentistry, to the most sophisticated restorative and cosmetic techniques. We use the newest technology available that will help keep you comfortable,...", and so on.

I see that you're making edits again; would you kindly comment on my question above? Do you intend to do anything about the SEO entries that you have re-added to OSM in this changeset?

I think that any contribution made by a spammer should be entirely removed because it has not been made with OSM's interests at heart; most likely the coordinates are from a proprietary geocoder and the object will usually be placed with little regard to what's around it. So if the spammer adds a hotel I would remove it. However if the spammer only adds a description tag to an already existing object then, as you say, it is excessive to delete the full object. That was the problem with this changeset - it even deleted a couple of roads that had been the target of spammers.

Hello lorec10, please do not add "proposed" boundaries to OSM. They are nearly impossible to verify, they make editing more difficult for everyone who touches one of the members of the relation, and they are of little use. In this particular case, you also fail to explain who is proposing this and what your sources are, but even if you were to add that information, proposed boundaries are not usually something we keep in OSM.

Hello lorec10, please do not add hardly-verifiable boundaries to OpenStreetMap. Even if you *were* living in the region and could therefore observe what language is spoken there, we don't usually map language areas in OpenStreetMap because they are so difficult to verify. Current administrative boundaries and post code areas are the boundaries we frequently map; historic or cultural boundaries would have to be of exceptional importance to have a place in OSM. This is the first time I have heard of a "Franco-German coexistence area" even though I live just 100km away.

Hi,

you seem to be adding lots of objects to OSM that have an address and a name but nothing else. This is not useful; you must use a tag that describes *what* the object is. Also I doubt that your use of the name tag is correct, since it would indicate that there must be an object CALLED "Johnny Reigel & Raymond Weller". Perhaps it would be more appropriate to use "inscription" or so instead of "name"? I don't know what these banners are; maybe historic=memorial is more appropriate. May I suggest that you discuss your project on the talk-us mailing list https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us to find the right way to add this information to OSM.

Yes, it was not an algorithm that I was planning to run regularly, I just had identified long-description objects made by users who have contributed very little, and then went through the list manually, using a translating web site for anything other than English and German. Quite possible that I accidentally removed a few good ones. My idea was to not reward spammers by leaving their shop or office on the map at all. I'm now waiting to see if Владимир К has more to offer than a knee-jerk revert.

Hello Владимир, against my warning you have reverted my changeset 53114647 instead of waiting for me to repair the problems. Now you are responsible for creating things like this: osm.org/way/384176165 and several 1000 other SEO entries in OpenStreetMap. Will you continue to work on this and remove advertising where it doesn't belong, or is the ball now with me again for a second attempt?

Hello Владимир, against my warning you have reverted this and now re-created things like this: osm.org/way/384176165 - will you now take over and do this properly, removing advertising from where it doesn't belong, or do you expect others to do this?

Hello Владимир К, Prince Kassad, indeed I have removed objects even if they *had* advertising in the past, and other mappers had removed the advertising in the mean time. That was unnecessary. I'll undelete the affected objects. Please refrain from reverting the full changeset because that would make you the "last editor" of thousands of SEO messages in OSM and you don't want that.

Hello, I'm sorry if I have accidentally deleted things that were not advertising. I'll look into the IDs specified by muralito and replace them. I have only deleted objects that were created by users who had a very small number of edits (usually, only one edit!) and who have added a long description tag that went like "XYZ is the best restaurant in ABC town" or so, i.e. where the description was clearly marketing and not just "descriptive". Tre0xf, it was not possible to "take it up with the user" because all these users have done practically nothing but add one POI and never use their account again! Can you point me to a specific thing that you think should not have been removed?