If the shared footpath if separated from the road by any physical barrier (even if just a kerb or strip of grass that *could* be traversed by a vehicle) then mapping the shared footpath as a separate way is always acceptable, even though it might be worth checking around especially when it comes to sidewalks along residential roads. In some areas mappers frown upon mapping them as separate geometries because it can make the map more difficult to handle.

Dear user Pilsa, please provide meaningful changeset comments when you upload changes to OSM. Adding these comments will make it unnecessary for others to ask: why did you do this or that - if you add a comment explaining what you did and why, that improces the quality of your contributions greatly!

Unsere mechanical edit guidelines betreffen alles, was nicht durch einen Menschen überprüft wurde, egal ob man sie mit JOSM macht oder mit einem Skript. Und diese Edits hier hast Du sicherlich nicht überprüft, sonst wäre Dir ja aufgefallen, das hier mehr nötig ist als ein bloßes Entfernen von Duplikaten. Was Du gemacht hast, war keine "Korrektur" - das war so, als ob jemand ein Pferd mappt mit animal=kow und Du "korrigierst" das dann auf animal=cow. Die Verantwortung für diesem Fehler trägst Du, die kannst Du nicht auf "inkompetente Editor-Programmierer" abwälzen, und die feine Art ist das überdies auch nicht gerade. Die Suche nach Duplikaten ist sicherlich sinnvoll - eventuell kann das eines der verbreiteten QA-Tools schon, ansonsten müsste man das mal in den OSMI, Osmose, oder Keepright einbauen. Aber einmal gefundene Duplikate müssen mit Sorgfalt untersucht und entfernt werden und nicht mit dem Holzhammer; wenn Deine Zeit nur für den Holzhammer ausreicht, dann ist es besser, jemand anders kümmert sich darum.

Dear Andre68, please stop your automatic edits. It is ok if you use scripts to find duplicates, but removing them automatically is a violation of our mechanical edit guidelines. If you had looked at the data you were "improving" here for just one second, you would have seen that this data is rubbish and needs to be removed wholesale. Instead you ran your scripts that make it *harder* for others to detect the problem, and make it harder for me to actually delete the problematic data.

Addition of "man_made=works" named "PBM" is not sufficiently explained by "source=maxar, bing" (the name is not visible on imagery) - is this from local knowledge, or from another source?

Erstens hat Maxar Premium am 10. Februar, als Du diese Änderung gemacht hast, in JOSM nicht funktioniert und zweitens ist dieses Gebäude auf Maxar Premium nicht zu sehen. Welche anderen Quellen verwendest Du?

Hallo Orgelputzer, stammen die Hausnummern, die Du hier hinzufügst, aus einer anderen Quelle, oder hast Du die selbst in einer Ortsbegehung erfasst?

Dieses Gebäude osm.org/way/771382668 ist nicht auf dem angegebenen Luftbild "ESRI World Imagery" zu sehen. Welche Quelle wurde hier tatsächlich verwendet?

DWG Ticket#2020013010000082. Please do not make edits that would make the islands either exclusively Greek or exclusively Turkish without first having got agreement from both the Turkish and Greek communities in OpenStreetMap. Boundary edits without such agreement will be treated as vandalism.

Dear Rick Sanchez C-137, you're making a large number of edits to road names, road numbers, and road classifications all over Greece. In order for the community to assess the veracity of these edits, you need to add changeset comments when uploading (see osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments) in which you explain what changes you're making and why. If applicable, please also specify the source you are relying on for such edits. Thank you!

I'm trying to take a measured approach here. If something is properly tagged(*) but has a spammy description, I will *normally* delete the spammy description only, except if the object in question is clearly added by a SEO spammer in violation of our mechanical/organised edit rules (e.g. hundreds of dubious "Bitcoin of America" ATMs) and/or clearly part of a scammy industry for which SEO spam is part of their business (Locksmiths being a prime example).

(*) I would normally count something as "properly tagged" if it has a halfway correct leisure/amenity/shop/offfice etc. tag; some businesses egregiously tag themselves amenity=place_of_worship and I will delete them without exception, some don't tag themselves at all (only name, description, opening hours) in which case I'll mostly delete them, and some use the wildcard office=company in which case it's a judgement call.

Happy to restore something to former glory if I should have overstepped.

Hello Warin61, please try and be more friendly when this is a simple beginner's mistake. -- Jason Heritage, it appears you have accidentally uploaded a test data set in an area where there aren't actually any buildings; I have removed them again. Don't let that discourage you - better luck next time ;)

What is the purpose of this newly introduced micro road: osm.org/way/770089902 ?

"Barrys Discount", meanwhile "Barry Beds & Mattresses", seems severely misplaced (in the middle of a footway). Can you verify?

You changed this way osm.org/way/141200813/history from amenity=university to building=university which will mean that it will not be recognized as an university by most data processors. Was that intended?

Das wäre auch freundlicher gegangen.

Hello Chellopuddin, can you send a photograph of the alleged signage to data@osmfoundation.org, or alternatively point to any official city or government web site that mentions "Chello Park"? Thank you.

These edits have been reverted by a community member. The current borders are the result of a long decision making process in OSM and cannot be modified unilaterally. Please email data@osmfoundation.org if you want to register a complaint.

These edits have been reverted by a community member. The current borders are the result of a long decision making process in OSM and cannot be modified unilaterally. Please email data@osmfoundation.org if you want to register a complaint.

Data Working Group here. You have bother been asked in the past to refrain from fiddling with data contributed by the other. @Adamant1, there is lots of rubbish data all over California that you could fix; could you be persuaded to concentrate your efforts in areas not originally worked by stevea? @stevea, it is an unnecessary slight to brandish someone "sloppy" in a changeset comment. Please don't. To be frank, data like osm.org/way/281209814 with the tags "OBJECTID", "Zoning", "SHAPE_STAr" and "SHAPE_STLe" should never have been imported that way in the first place; this would never pass muster on today's import guidelines. I would prefer if Adamant1 had not edited this, but editing it and not getting rid of the rubbish tags is doubly bad. But it is what it is! @Both: We have asked you repeatedly to keep the peace and if you don't we will have no choice but give you both a cool-off account block so that you can enjoy the beautiful non-OSM life out there for a while.