OpenStreetMap
CurlingMan13's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 147966350 | about 1 year ago | Hello. I noticed that it also removed the gnis:ftype=* Fort example:
It looks like it should be a pipeline, but now that the data is removed, there really isn't much detail on what the shape/way/line is. |
| 159390999 | about 1 year ago | I never called your edits vandalism. I only said only things that actually exist should be mapped (in accordance with OSM guidelines). Things that no longer exist (regardless of what it is) should not be mapped. Old buildings, roads, powerlines, railways, woods, etc. It doesn't matter if you squint your eyes and say "I see something that may have been a feature". If it no longer exists, it shouldn't be mapped. Features that jo loner exist should be mapped on OHM. What you were doing was mass reverts to remove every edit I did to remove new features, fixes and business and readd things that clearly no longer exist. |
| 159291652 | about 1 year ago | Good edit. Keep up the good work!
|
| 159293497 | about 1 year ago | Welcome to OSM. Changeset reviewed. Looks good.
|
| 159293802 | about 1 year ago | Hello. And welcome to OSM. I reviewed your edit and found it to be good. Keep up the good work and don't hesitate to reach out if you have any questions.
|
| 159351330 | about 1 year ago | On OSM, we map what is on the ground, even what can only been seen from above using aerial imagery. To denote that something is private, we use something called access tags. You canr ead more on why deletion is not the answer here: |
| 159351330 | about 1 year ago | On OSM, we map what is on the ground, even what can only been seen from above using aerial imagery. To denote that something is private, we use something called access tags. You canr ead more on why deletion is not the answer here: |
| 159351398 | about 1 year ago | On OSM, we map what is on the ground, even what can only been seen from above using aerial imagery. To denote that something is private, we use something called access tags. You canr ead more on why deletion is not the answer here: |
| 145855026 | about 1 year ago | That's not something we map... |
| 159390999 | about 1 year ago | I have no clue what you are trying to say.... I understand what the term means. In this context it is referring to the fact that personal info was mapped and should have never been mapped. An informal trail through the woods shouldn't be mapped in that manner. |
| 159324491 | about 1 year ago | Changeset reverted. We use access tags to denote private property.
|
| 159304660 | about 1 year ago | Changeset reverted. We use access tags to denote private property.
|
| 159304647 | about 1 year ago | Changeset reverted. We use access tags to denote private property.
|
| 159304625 | about 1 year ago | Changeset reverted. We use access tags to denote private property.
|
| 115029782 | about 1 year ago | Changeset reverted. This is not how you map a golf course with fake buildings. |
| 159175271 | about 1 year ago | I have kindly asked you to stop removing features and to stop deleting additional details. I have no clue why you feel the need to remove this business and others that were added: |
| 159133998 | about 1 year ago | I have no choice but to again revert this changeset. You removed features that did exist and were verified, such as: You also readded a business that no longer exists and was properly removed.
This feature was expanded in detail from node to an area and the no longer existing railway was removed as per OSM guidelines that only what currently exists should be mapped:
The area of this parking lot was correct until you reverted it:
These features no longer exist with absolutely no trace as they have been completely overbuilt by new buildings or new features that would require complete excavation of whatever may have been there before:
These features were updated to reflect that part of the railway was indoors, yet you removed this bit of detail by carelessly reverting:
Again, I ask you to stop reverting en masse. This is a community with a simple guideline, map only what is on the ground and can be verified. Features that no longer exist do not belong on OSM. You are causing damage to the map and data and I have already asked you to stop but was met with antagonism and hostility via your profile page. |
| 159114770 | about 1 year ago | As I had commented before, only features that currently exist should be mapped. Features that no longer exist should not be mapped on OSM, and should instead be mapped on OHM (OpenHistoricalMap). I tried to engage previously, but was met with hostility and antagonism (referring to your profile page). You have reverted changesets nilly-willy, without checking that the features removed were actually overbuilt and replaced. And in the process of your careless reverts, you have removed many valid additions, including new railways, new buildings, landuses, etc. Again, I can't stress this enough, OSM is only for what *currently* exists and can be verified, not for what once exists. I have asked you to stop adding (or readding) features that no longer exist and have been built over/replaced and to cease the hasty deletion/reverts of new features that have been verified. osm.wiki/Good_practice#:~:text=Do%20not%20map%20objects%20if%20they%20do%20not%20exist%20currently |
| 159094081 | about 1 year ago | Changeset reverted. We use access tags to denote private property.
|
| 159094112 | about 1 year ago | Changeset reverted. We use access tags to denote private property.
|