Hello,

I am referring to this object you created:
way/1291530282

Please observe that:

* The name tag is solely for the official name of an object (roads, shops have names cables usually don’t). "name=câble au sol inconnu" sounds really weird, this is a description.

* OSM is an international database, numerical values should be… numbers (obviously) and tags should be written in English.
"height=au sol" or "material=acier" will not be parsed correctly → use height=0 and material=steel to get the objects properly parsed in the database.

Hope this helps.

I’ve already restored a correct shape for some buildings + removed some of the tags that should not be added on individual objects (like postcode and city name). It takes some time to fix an existing layout, that is also why it’s better to do it right from the start. ;-)

Hello and welcome to OSM.
Thanks for adding houses but I think there is a problem here.
The software reports that you are tracing buildings on top of… aerial imagery.
This is not how we work.
If you do this, you will not be tracing the correct shapes. Aerial imagery is taken by aircrafts but every house is slightly distorted, and those pictures change every year, and the houses look a bit different with every release.
In Flanders, you should use "Digitaal Vlaanderen GRB" and draw on top of that. Those are the official shapes of buildings.
In the online editor you will find this under the Background button (right-hand side of your screen). Scroll down the list until you find the correct background.
Hope this helps.
Happy mapping.

⚠️ Ne pas attacher les landuses aux routes, svp.
way/1306758887
Ces erreurs sont très difficiles à réparer pour ceux qui doivent passer après vous.

This place is right on the border between two Belgian regions. Depending on where is the centre of your screen when you start mapping, it can be UrbIS imagery or Digitaal Vlaanderen, not to mention the other available choices (Mapbox, Bing…).

Hello,

Can you please explain the source of data or imagery you used to trace those new areas? We have a few questions about the accuracy and it might be the choice or date of the imagery. As you apparently refuse to provide changeset comments or fill the source field, I feel I must ask you here.
Thanks in advance.

Thanks but please observe that in Belgium we prefer not to repeat addresses on POI, especially in cases like this where the POI is fully enclosed in a container building and automatically inherits its address.
Don’t worry, I fixed this. ;-)

I transferred your question to another mapper who can do some research about how to name places.
Next time, please abstain from commenting on other people’s changesets to ask ordinary questions.
Commenting on a changeset implies that there is something wrong with the changeset itself. This is not the case here, and the changeset description explains exactly what I changed. The name was added several years ago, and by someone else. Just because someone was the last user to touch an object does not mean that the mapper is responsible for 100% of the history of that object.

In de vorige situatie werd een uitzondering voorzien voor fietsers.
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1089651611943352

Bevestig je dat er hier *geen* M2-borden bestaan, dus enkel "oneway=yes" zonder "oneway:bicycle=no"?

Hello,

Thanks for this beautiful "no comment" changeset. For anyone wondering, it looks like you the changeset is about adding plattform markers and railway signals.

Apart from the lack of changeset title, can you please be a little more careful when dealing with geometries of existing data. If you want to add a signal to an existing track, that is fine, but please make sure to create the node on the existing track: just a simple click and release with the mouse in JOSM and that will work. It looks like you did something else, i.e. dragging existing nodes. As a result, several tracks here have a totally silly geometry, as if the track was only a few centimeters from the platftorm edge. I am now trying to repair this.

I understand you only have a few contributions so far. I insist: it takes a lot of experience to draw large railway stations properly, in particular in dense areas with datas on several levels. You might want to start learning on smaller stations first.

Have a nice day.

Hello,
I see there are already 3 restaurants on the map here. The history of this node shows that a mapper indicated that this one was being converted into a supermarket soon. Since you re-tagged it as a restaurant, I would like to check with you that you can confirm that this node is *not* one of the others. I am asking because I have frequently seen this mistake from new users. And StreetComplete makes it difficult to tell POI apart when they are close.
Thanks in advance.

There are linked together, aren’t they?
relation/17903934

Merci, c'est un ajout utile.
Côté de la rue de Ransbeek elle était uniquement connectée à un trottoir, donc le routage vélo ne marche pas car il n'y a pas de continuité. On a fait la correction.

Addresses in the Brussels-Capital Region are already on the map. Please do not repeat them on every possible object, it creates unwanted duplicates in the database. We’ll fix this.

Hello,

Your changeset has been reverted.

Hint: StreetComplete shows the operator name of such amenities. You were asked for the one run by "Bruxelles-Propreté - Net Brussel" (which only collects glass bottles) but it looks like you answered "cooking oil". This was meant for the Oliobox, which is another object.

Don’t worry, I fixed it.

An obvious mistake by a user’s first contribution in OSM. There is only one business here. I did some cleanup of all the bad tags.

Pour info, tous les points à l’intérieur du périmètre ici relation/2002638 sont automatiquement reconnus comme CP 4500.
Il est inutile de rajouter cette info sur chaque point à l’intérieur de la zone, ce n'est pas comme ça que fonctionne OSM. C’est une base de données géographiques. ;-)

Hello,
Thanks for the efforts of trying to edit the map.
We had to redo a few things because you created address points multiple times and created a building in an existing building, but now the map should be okay, with Securitas on its new location.
(The map always takes a couple of hours to refresh, it will be visible later thtis morning, normally.)
Happy mapping!

Hello Al Chaffeuh,

Yes, your edits have raised some questions today. They look like typical mistakes people would do when editing OSM for the first time, no-one can know everything, of course.

I am sure you acted in good faith and we are grateful to you for raising the point that addresses 7 and 9 are on different locations, contrary to what government data says. User Jakka and myself intervened a few minutes ago to fix some of the mistakes here and restore correct data on the map. It should be okay. I also fixed several issues from your other edits (e.g. Brulocalis).

Thanks to RaphaelPasloin too for giving some explanations about the problems.

Have a nice day.

The changeset is correct, the previous comment was intented to thank the user who opened a note.