The monorail in Hochgurgl actually was there before; perhaps aerial views are outdated?

No answer, does that mean, no source?

FYI - how to use a lifecycle namespace: changeset/83023860 and https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=83023860

LanovkarJ, I would be interested to learn where you got the information for the aerialway Walderalm-Huderbank-Eiskar from.

It is no longer on the map, but you can see some hints still here https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=81513645

LanovkarJ, I would be interested to learn where you got the information for the aerialway Walderalm-Huderbank-Eiskar from.

It is no longer on the map, but you can see some hints still here https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=82024546

PPS: And they were 24 years of age ;)

PS: this is what it looks like to navigate on wrong info "https://oekastatic.orf.at/mims/2020/14/05/crops/w=582,h=327,q=60,r=1.5/521054_master_176105_verbotenespritztour5.jpg" You may have to select the full link inside the ""

Hi, Let me remind you, openstreetmap is a database, that is used in quite a lot of places. so correct information is very much appreciated.

Some info can only be collected by a survey. An aerialview can only tell you so much, and websites are not always reliable. If you are not certain about a thing, you rather not map it. A wrong statement is much worse than a missing one.

Lets look at https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=82941627 to see what you did change:

Knabllift - you changed the name to the same as its alt_name, but this lift indeed seems to be known under two different names (even by the same source, the local tourism office).

Wurzerlift - you added the tag demolished, but there is no such tag, there is a namespace demolished: (mind the colon at the end), see demolished=*: - The lift will still show on the map; only under the other name. You might have just deleted the lift, but leaving it in place under the namespaced demolished:aerialway will hide it from the map and prevent future couchmappers from drawing it again, just because they see it on an aerial view.

Do you get that? With your age, I think you should!

Die Verbindung Sonnbichllift - Almkopfbahn ist falsch.
OSM is not about filling the void with stuff made up in your head :(

PS: Resource mentioned above - https://www.tennengau.com/magazin/die-5-schoensten-fotospots-in-st-martin-am-tennengebirge/ says the lift is no longer (as of March 2020)

I see, now you removed the "Bergstation" - I you do not know where it is - why did you put it there?

From a websearch I learned, that this is called "Alter Wurzerlift" - maybe it has been demolished as of now, that might explain, why the tourism office does not know it…

Anyways, I reverted your changes, as the rest of the changeset also does more harm than good.

2) Why did you rename Knabllift? This is the name the local tourism office calls it.
3) Why did you connect the piste with the power line?
4) How old are you?

And how did you learn the name of the lift?

The local tourism office does not know about a lift with that name, that is under operation - see https://www.stmartin.info/de/aktivdorf/skifahren/schneehoehen-lifte.html

Question: How do you know the building on the aerial view is the "Bergstation"?

This is not a repair :(

Was ist das für eine Reparatur? In meinem ganzen Leben habe ich nie einen Schlepplift mit drei Stationen gesehen!

Wurzerlift Bergstation

I see, you are at it again. For a moment, consider, that openstreetmap is not your personal playground.

Then tell me, why you put a station away from the aerialway. This does not make any sense!

Hmm, I even did try to look it up on dict.cc cs<>de with no results - seznam.cz at least suggests lanovka - apparently they know about declension.

As the mapper does not reply, in defense of my revert, which he contested, continuing from leofranz: Searching the web for the original moniker finds fotos by some Lanovkář that show skiing settings. In case that is the same person, some of the changes could indeed be first hand observations. Yet the spread of activity of the mapper would be quite expensive and time consuming an undertaking, if physically going all the places touched. Not out of the possible though, that option does not line up with the factual errors in his changesets. If those can be traced to some websites, all the more reason for a much broader revert.