Por que foi removido o Pantanal propriamente dito, que são as áreas de wetlands
relation/7414258/history?

O que restou
relation/10215897
não é o Pantanal, mas apenas o "Parque Nacional do Pantanal Matogrossense", que é uma ínfima pedaço do Pantanal.

Você fala em remover imprecisão, mas:
O contorno podia não ser 100% preciso, pois obtido de resolução mais baixa.
Não existe 100% de precisão geométrica em mapas.
Se for imprecisão da geometria, só se remove geometria imprecisa se for adicionar outra mais precisa; caso contrário se está removendo a informação toda, não uma imprecisão.

Sim?

Olá,
que me recordo foi daqui:

Case Report Open Access
"Groundwater Management in the 300 bce-1100ce Pre-Columbian City of Tiwanaku (Bolivia)"

https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/groundwater-management-in-the-300-bce-1100ce-pre-columbian-city-of-tiwanaku-bolivia-2157-7587.1000168.php?aid=26266
(ver PDF)

https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/groundwater-management-in-the-300-bce-1100ce-pre-columbian-city-of-tiwanaku-bolivia-2157-7587.1000168.pdf

"New discoveries and perspectives on water management at 300 Bc-Ad 1100 tiwanaku’s urban center (bolivia)"
https://medcraveonline.com/MOJCE/new-discoveries-and-perspectives-on-water-management-at-300-bc-ad-1100-tiwanakursquos-urban-center-bolivia.html

Hi, thanks, one note: tracks going to houses are always at least "highway=service" such as way/750640201 .

Hi. Is this point actual or historical? OSM is just for actual elements.

Já corrigi.

A imagem é que deve estar deslocada, cerca de 150m p/NW.
Você pode recolocar o ponto no lugar?

Olá.
Por que você deslocou o ponto do pico do Monte Roraima?(node/3773469438/history)
Segundo coordenadas do IBGE (http://www.bdg.ibge.gov.br/bdg/pdf/relatorio.asp?L1=90128) era onde estava antes.
E no mesmo documento diz que nestas coordenadas é onde realmente está o "marco da tríplice fronteira (Brasil - Guiana - Venezuela)."
?

Ah ok muchas gracias. Sérgio

Hola, bueno trabajo, pero parece que hay un río desplazado por el nodo de la ciudad de Purús en
node/1237320319
Puedes arreglarlo?

Who did wrong, to correct?
Where is this the other stretch of that long river that was mapped?
way/384245084
Much better think twice before simply deleting and not replacing what was there before. Right?

Will you add that previous extension? Preserving its history of editions, as ugood practice? It's not hard to do.

Ok for MAXAR, it's being provided by default in JOSM by now.

Another point:
MAXAR is a prived company that provide satellite image.

Digital Globe, which was accquired by MAXAR, provided license for OSM:

osm.wiki/DigitalGlobe#Legal_permissions

But:
there's no DG anymore.
MAXAR is the new owner.

Does OSM have such explicit accordance of MAXAR to use images for mapping under OSM's conditions? If not, you can't use MAXAR's data nor images.

Please read and answer comment about your editions.
This is good practice in OSM.

Also:
osm.wiki/Good_practice#Keep_the_history

osm.wiki/How_We_Map

Also the comment at:
changeset/70528771

Please read and answer comment about your editions.
This is good practice in OSM.

Also:
osm.wiki/Good_practice#Keep_the_history

osm.wiki/How_We_Map

Also the comment at:
changeset/70528771

Have you read what was indicated there?
At changeset/70442555

Let's do the right way:
I posed a question, so that is what deserves an answer.

See:
Q.1)
-There was ~40Km of river mapped by others before;
-All those 40km were deleted by @edathy in
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=70442555;
-The geometry you said was only ~3km (way/691231860);
-Where are the other extension?
-Why was 90% deleted, and not substitued?

Now another account doing the same deletion, lefting more than 70% empty:
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=71264341

This is not an improvement.
You left just empty, the longest part of what was before.


Q.2)
-Why both editors don't answer what was asked?
-Is this a 3rd account?
-Have you read what was indicated there?

If so, you would've known:

osm.wiki/Good_practice#Keep_the_history

Keep the history means:
In OSM we do not just delete what was mapped by others before, if that's not plainly wrong.
If we think it's worth to improve, we rather preserve the history of objects:

Just by selecting the new geometry,
together with the old one,
and "replace geometry" (CTRL+G).

That's is respect for the work of previous editors.

Anyway, not leaving empty what was mapped before.
If you want to improve, improve the whole geometry.

Do you understand?

Obrigado, respondi lá.

Parece que tem 2 contas fazendo a mesma coisa, e não respondendo:
changeset/70442555

changeset/71264341

Why did you delete this river:
way/384245084/history

Exactly the same deleted few days ago, here:
changeset/70442555
Have you read those comments?

Are you using sock puppet account?

So?

Have you've seen you deleted the biggest part of the river?
In OSM we don't just delete, we'd rather correct, so to preserve history.
You should not just search by "landsat" old sources and delete the feature (BTW in the history of that you can see it was registered further improved with source:image=Bing 2015-12-02). See objects history before.
There are 2 ways to correct preserving history in JOSM: "improve way" (shortcut: W); or draw a new way, select with the old, and do "replace" with Ctrl+Shift+G, so you preserve its history.

See also:
osm.wiki/How_We_Map
osm.wiki/Category:OSM_best_practice

Obrigado, já examinei, reverti e vou deixar recado. Valeu!

Good. Also nice if you can add its "website=*"