OpenStreetMap logo OpenStreetMap

Changeset When Comment
135862945 over 2 years ago

Reverted in:
changeset/136321777

135865394 over 2 years ago

Please use more detailed changeset comments. What did you update, why, etc.?

You can read about it in more detail here:
osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments#:~:text=A%20good%20changeset%20comment%20should,have%20edited%20on%20the%20map.

135862945 over 2 years ago

Do not incorrectly add trees as buildings. This is not correct. They should be tagged as woods or trees not buildings. This edit has been reverted in part or full.

134749110 over 2 years ago

Do not incorrectly add trees as buildings. This is not correct. This edit has been reverted in part or full.

134555776 over 2 years ago

Do not incorrectly add trees as buildings. This is not correct. This edit has been reverted in part or full.

116304446 over 2 years ago

What source do you have for this pipeline since it isn't visible form above? And what is it? Does it really go beneath all the buildings?

131756511 over 2 years ago

FYI, you don't need to add "Area=yes" tags to the features like parking lots or buildings as this is redundant.

70476295 over 2 years ago

FYI - individual sections of parking shouldn't be mapped as seperate parking lots since it is all one lot.

118341477 over 2 years ago

Buildings can be squared using "q"

72308890 over 2 years ago

What in the world is going on here?!? Numbers for names but different from addresses?

Plus, none of them are squared with right-angle corners?

7282254 over 2 years ago

Most of these "abandoned" railways do not have anything on the ground with no ground truth. Specifically:
way/99652729

These "abandoned" railways should be moved to OHM and removed from OSM since only things that actually exist on the ground and can be verified should be mapped.

Furthermore, these railways definitely do not cross I-70.

135522105 over 2 years ago

Can you elaborate on what you did, rather than requesting someone to review your edit?

109901620 over 2 years ago

I mean like squared angles or 90 degrees. :D

Definitely not just squares! The outlines are pretty good other than that! :D

134995608 over 2 years ago

Segment referenced in the second comment:
way/304325177

It seems very unreliable to be adding segments that don't have ground truth across a freeway.

134995608 over 2 years ago

Additionally, can you elaborate on why you readded a "razed" railroad that has been mostly overbuilt by a freeway, I-190? There is definitely no crossing across the freeway. None of the aerial imagery nor street-level imagery have any railway, razed or otherwise going across the freeway.

Since there is no trace of this on the ground since the western segment has been overbuilt and long replaced by a major roadway with NO crossings across the freeway, it really shouldn't be mapped in accordance with OSM guidelines of only mapping what is on the ground and can be verified:
osm.wiki/Good_practice#Map_what's_on_the_ground

134995608 over 2 years ago

Can you elaborate on why you readded:
way/97788410

Is there really evidence of a railway going through multiple buildings and down the middle of multiple roads? There is evidence of rails on any aerial imagery that would be considered "razed" and there is no obvious RoW. It has been completely overbuilt by new buildings, railways, and roadways.

109902547 over 2 years ago

None of the buildings are square. "Q" can be used to square them.

109901620 over 2 years ago

You can square buildings using "Q". None of the buildings added in this changeset are square.

135482900 over 2 years ago

Also removed some features that no longer exist with no trace remaining that have long been overbuilt been new features, buildings and ponds.

135453274 over 2 years ago

It would be. Good catch. I'll take care of it.