Reverted destructive edits DWG Ticket#2025091810000091

changeset/172099214

Reverted destructive edits DWG Ticket#2025091810000091

changeset/172099214

Nodes like this node/287558718 do not describe any features that exist in real life, they just describe the shape of other objects. Such nodes should not have an operator tag.

You might also want to check objects such as
way/1376728533, and make sure you're not adding this tag to public roads incorrectly.

When you add the operator tag you're essentially stating that they control that object and have the ability to close it down, and that they are responsible for it.

Best regards,
Taya Snijder

Hello,

In this changeset you added the operator tag to everything including thousands of untagged nodes and several untagged ways used by relations. Please revert those changes.

Best regard,
Taya Snijder

The normal workflow would be to just adjust the existing objects instead of replacing them with new ones.

You always have to be mindful of already existing data. Otherwise you might end up with situations like this, where a previously mapped road overlaps with newly added buildings way/1115154608

Thank you for your response RKhabib,

Please in the future list the sources you used in the changeset.

Furthermore, it is generally encouraged to not delete old data and replace it but rather update the existing data. So please be mindful of that.

And also please do not create relations for buildings like you've done now.Both relation/19610655 and relation/19607211 should be deleted. Each individual building should just be tagged on its own with no relation at all.

Please also explain what you mean by "id=0" which you've added to all the buildings (Example: way/1430433074)

Best regards,
Taya Snijder

Please see osm.org/user_blocks/18739

What "latest image maps and data retrieval" did you use?

Hello RKhabib,

You deleted a large number of objects in this changeset and then subsequently added new ones in changeset/171992744

However there are some issues with that changeset. Namely:
* There is no source listed
* All buildings are part of a gigantic unneccecary 4213 member relation
* The individual building outlines all have the nonsensical tag `Id=0`
* You have not adjusted any of the previously mapped roads, which now overlap with the buildings.

Is this some sort of import? if so, what is the source of this import and can we use their data?

Best regard,
Taya Snijder

Y'all stopped doing this for a good while. Why now again?

changeset/171722834

Hallo Martijn, ik had jouw vorige account voor 4 dagen geblokeert. Dit had ik gedaan zodat jij even de tijd zou kunnen nemen om de situatie te begrijpen.

Alle adressen in Nederland staan al op de kaart. Deze hoef jij dus niet toe te voegen.

Zou je in het vervolg alsjeblieft met andere mensen willen praten in plaats van de kaart voor iedereen te bewerken?

Precies zoals jij het hier gisteren hebt gedaan note/4938236

Vriendelijke groet,
Taya Snijder

Reverted fictional edits

changeset/171299941

Reverted fictional edits

changeset/171299937

Reverted fictional edits

changeset/171299937

Reverted fictional edits

changeset/171299896

Reverted fictional edits

changeset/171299896

I do get that. It can look rather messy. What arguably might help is micromapping it further ironically enough.

If the backyards, fences, hedges, etc are also mapped, the trees stand out less. Though this is of course a lot of work and maybe also a matter of taste :P

osm.org/#map=18/55.973618/-3.213345
osm.org/#map=19/52.345996/4.970495

Best regards,
Taya Snijder

As a general rule of thumb, always try to increase the amount of detail. Removing individual trees and replacing them with blobs of forest is removing detail.

Additionally having a cluster of trees does not necessarily make it a forest. What I see here is just some trees in people's backyard. They're on top of driveways, grass yards, houses. That's hardly what I would call a forest.

Hello Guy-with-an-e-bike@,

Do we have permission from elcykelforum.dk to copy their data?

Best regards,
Taya Snijder, on behalf of OpenStreetMap’s Data Working Group

I was in this town last week. There definitely is an open bicycle store here, though I recall it having a different name. cycle Something gråsten. I did not record the name at that time.