Hallo lberges, ich finde die Benennung von Bauernhöfen mit den Betreibernamen problematisch. Ich plane, die von Dir eingetragenen Namen zu entfernen. In https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/beratungsresistente-user-und-deren-verbotene-quellen/97142/160 habe ich das zur Diskussion gestellt.

Hello Lex legis, please specify a source for change of the name "Acquarenaparkplatz" to "Acquarenaparkplatz - Parcheggio Acquarena". I have the suspicion that you are simply translating the name, which would not be acceptable in OSM. You need to demonstrate that the name is actually signed or used like that. The same holds true for your other additions of Italian names like e.g. the change of "Solebecken" to "Solebecken - Piscina di acqua salata". I repeat, it is not sufficient to assume that just because street names follow the convention "German name - Italian name" in this region that every POI (and even individual installations of a spa compound) follow the same nomenclature.

Hallo Anonymus1715, bitte versuche doch, bei Deinen Beiträgen etwas sprechendere Kommentare als "Verschiedene Änderungen" zu verwenden - damit man auf einen Blick sieht, was Du gemacht hast. Was deine Edits and Landnutzungsgebieten betrifft, die sind etwas zu feingliedrig für OSM. Mini-Wiesen wie osm.org/way/1244842678 sind übertrieben. Leider haben andere in diesem Teil Österreichs da in der Vergangenheit viel Murks gemacht mit über-detaillierten Landnutzungsflächen und es wird noch lange dauern, das wieder aufzuräumen - lass dich nicht davon verleiten. OSM ist kein Ausmalbuch für Grünflächen. Auch bei Gebäuden solltest Du es mit der "Genauigkeit" nicht übertreiben; osm.org/way/113253047 hast Du von einem rechteckigen Gebäude in ein 15-Eck verwandelt, ohne dass wirklich mehr Nutzen entstanden ist.

Dear pseudotsuga1, welcome to OSM and thank you for helping out. We pride ourselves in human-curated data rather than auto-detected machine-learning output. I notice that you're contributing at high volume using various RapID data sources but the quality is below what you can do as a human. For example osm.org/way/1242503040 which you have added as a dead-end leading nowhere, if you look at the aerial image you will see it connects through to the next settlement. Don't blindly copy AI-detected stuff into OSM - use your brain and triple the value of your contribution.

I won't "pretend to be a lawyer". OSM is not in the business of interpreting copyright law; we simply don't use content unless we (a) have personally done the survey, or (b) have permission - either directly from the owner or where the owner has put their stuff under a license that is compatible with OSM.

Hall Polarbear, das Bezirksamt Pankow schreibt an den FOSSGIS: "Die öffentliche Grün- und Erholungsanlage, gelegen zwischen der Michelangelostraße 51 und
71, wurde nach der ukrainischen Großstadt Riwne in „Riwne Platz“ benannt. " -- Man beachte den fehlenden Bindestrich. Ich finde allerdings Deine Schreibung auch besser ;)

OpenStreetMap Data Working Group here. slice0 is wrong, fortera_au has accurately reported the general consensus in the project - we do not use third-party sources unless permission has been given. If you wish to use someone's video on YouTube to add speed limits then you have to obtain permission from the maker of the video. Copyright law is not always crystal clear, and OpenStreetMap prefers to err on the side of caution. Taking a careless attitude towards copyright could open up downstream users of OSM data to copyright violation claims and hence damage the standing of OpenStreetMap. (DWG Ticket#2024012310000196)

Hallo Ryblix, schaust Du Dir das Tagging von osm.org/way/70422425 nochmal an ("bicycle=s") - da stimmt offenbar was nicht, aber ich weiss nicht, was Du erreichen wolltest, weil Du im Kommentar nur "verbessert" geschrieben hast...

Ich habe jetzt in osm.org/changeset/146455745 das westliche Wegstück gelöscht. Falls die Prüfung durch die Gemeinde ergibt, dass hier ein öffentlicher Weg ist, gern mit entsprechenden Belegen (!) wiederherstellen.

Der "BayernAtlas" ist keine für OSM zulässige Quelle, aber er zeigt hier keine Verbindung über den Mühlbach: https://geoportal.bayern.de/bayernatlas/?lang=de&topic=ba&bgLayer=atkis&catalogNodes=11&E=661733.04&N=5316684.68&zoom=13

Naja, Komoot ist eine deutsche Firma und daher für den Waldbesitzer auf dem Rechtsweg leicht in die Zange zu nehmen. Der Eigentümer behauptet, dass der Weg zur Hälfte eben nicht im "Waldbereich" liegt sondern durch seinen Garten führe. Ob er "radlbar" ist oder nicht, ist ja hier nicht die Frage ("radlbar" ist auch Waldboden) sondern ob der Eigentümer das Recht hat, das Radeln zu untersagen. Der Eigentümer schreibt: "Unser Grundstück ist nicht eingezäunt, es gibt aber Hinweisschilder, dass es sich um Privatgrund handelt und der Durchgang nicht erlaubt ist"; Du schreibst "In Openstreetmap ist der aktuelle Status dokumentiert.", aber in OpenStreetMap sind keine Durchgangsverbote dokumentiert. Wann hast Du zuletzt überprüft, ob da Schilder aufgestellt sind?

I will not be drawn into an argument about what the local name for "Pacific Ocean" is but you have already violated your parole by removing some of these names a second time after being told not to; should you attempt to fiddle with these names again, you will be barred from further contributions.

The were especially concerned about the service road that parallels the A247 from Summers to the Clandon Park car park, and said that this was private also.

The same user has performed similar deletions again which I reverted in osm.org/changeset/146081198, and sent them a 0-hour block message.

Hello there mgrubbsjr, in this changeset you have deleted a whole number of objects, only to re-create them again with a slight offset. Don't do that - it loses the history of objects. For example, it now looks as if you were the original author of osm.org/way/1238440645 when in truth that very same object had been created over five years ago by another user osm.org/way/676698134. Additionally, that other user had explicitly recorded this to be a sandy area - information that is now lost after your edit. Same with osm.org/way/676698137 which was explicitly marked as being grass, and which you replaced with the near-identical osm.org/way/1238440642, now without that additional information. The ID editor has support for moving features if they are misaligned, or if ID's capabilities are insufficient for what you want to do, check out the JOSM editor. Keep in mind, however, that aerial imagery can easily be off by 5 meters - if you cycle through different backgrounds in ID you will see how each imagery is slightly different. Do not blindly trust one imagery over the other without having calibrated it with the help of precise GPS tracks.

Deletion reverted - see osm.org/user_blocks/15565

Hello and welcome Darya Khan! Please don't put things like "d10" in the "name" field. If the house has the number 10, then there's an extra "house number" field for that. The "name" field is usually left empty for residential properties.

Also, you don't have to press "save" for every single house; you can draw a handful of houses and then save all at once.

Hello Ivan Tarasenko, are you the same person who previously used the "asdgvbfhdg" account? It would be a good idea to avoid making mini-uploads for every building... better to create 10 or 20 buildings and then upload them at once.

Hey there asdgvbfhdg, no need to click the "save" button after every individual building you upload. You can create 10 or 20 buildings and then upload them all together!

Hello there, please do not do wholesale imports of MS building footprints through the RapID editor. You must check the data for correctness before you upload. In this changeset, at least the buildings osm.org/way/1237882803 and osm.org/way/1237882828 are definitely incorrect and should not have been added like that.