Hi you seem to be deleting lots of buildings and then replacing them with new ones. Even if you were the original contributor that would seem like a bad idea as in general we want to retain the history of objects.

addr:place refers to "any" non-street object at that level of localisation. A hamlet is just one example of such a situation, others include localities in alpine villages and so on. In the case of Paradeplatz you don't even need to take my word for it, both the GWR http://qa.poole.ch/ch-roads/allroads/261.html and the "official" street list from swisstopo agree that Paradeplatz isn't a street.

Ich hab die Mehrfacheinträge für die Firma entfernt, dass ist definitiv nicht sinnvoll.

Firmennamen in anderen Sprachen können mit name:en name:fr etc am gleichen Objekt eingetragen werden.

Maarten das Problem ist, dass 'nirgendwo' stimmt nicht, in der Schweiz ist es im Augenblick üblich die Säulen einzeln zu erfassen. Eine Diskussion zur Modellierung findet übrigens im Augenblick auf talk-ch statt.

Reverted in changeset/127155901

Reverted in changeset/127155928

Reverted in changeset/127155985

Reverted in changeset/127155985

Reverted in changeset/127156003

Reverted in changeset/127156042

Next time you notice a vandal pls notify the DWG via the "Report user" function.

PS: Sempach Station is the "postalische Ortschaft" which is an independent concept used as the "city" level object in addresses which does not need to be an actual place or municipality.

Yes, as said it is the "street level" object in addresses, but there is no -street- that has the name just the area which is what you are confirming, see also http://qa.poole.ch/ch-roads/allroads/1093.html

But that is the place/"ortsteil" name which in many places in Switzerland serves as a replacement for the "street" part in a postal address, see also https://map.geo.admin.ch/?lang=en&topic=ech&bgLayer=ch.swisstopo.pixelkarte-farbe&layers=ch.swisstopo.zeitreihen,ch.bfs.gebaeude_wohnungs_register,ch.bav.haltestellen-oev,ch.swisstopo.swisstlm3d-wanderwege,ch.astra.wanderland-sperrungen_umleitungen,ch.swisstopo.amtliches-strassenverzeichnis&layers_opacity=1,1,1,0.8,0.8,0.85&layers_visibility=false,false,false,false,false,true&layers_timestamp=18641231,,,,,&E=2658550.50&N=1218460.25&zoom=11&catalogNodes=457,491

Hi

It would seem that there is no street named Adelwil in Adelwil according to official data. Do you have a street sign or similar that you could point to? Otherwise I would suspect that the relevant streets should have no name at all.

A couple of remarks:

- currently SchweizMobil data is off limits. We had a productive meeting with them and the BAV / Astra end of last year and there is some hope that this might change in the near future, but as this is an economic pain point for them things may come out differently. I'll reach out to them and find out what the current state is asap.

- If you are using third party sources always list them on the changeset.

- in general it is not a good idea to simply start using third party data without vetting that it is OK to use -beforehand-.

I agreed with the owner to make its access private. They are considering actually putting up a sign to that effect. I wouldn't delete the path as it is clearly visible and it will just get added back.

PS: as this is agriculturally used land, they can't actually stop people from accessing from a pure legal pov.

Hi, you added way/184204868 in this changeset. SOSM has received a complaint that this is a private path. Can you by any chance remember if you surveyed this in person or added be other means?

Hallo, die Änderungen die du hier gemacht hast scheinen alle falsch zu sein, auf diesen Strassen war der Zugang für Motorfarhrzeuge schon auf den Zubringerdienst beschränkt alles andere ist falsch.

@Mashin while I can understand your sentiment, there is so much wrong with the import that it will be less work, including for the importer to redo it properly if it is even desired. In particular the overlapping data makes no sense at all to try and clean up "manually".

Hi, you seem to have added "lots" of data on top of the existing data in these changesets. Was this import discussed in any form with the community before? It is definitely technically defective.