i seem to be missing something here from chronic lack of sleep.

i too have traced building outlines from basemap.at where aerials were unclear, as well as copied word-for-word names therefrom.

i suggest every one of my OSM contributions therefore be reverted for this highly illegal plagiarism and a lifetime ban be imposed.

Yours, Freebear
Well-paid Russian Propaganda Plant, Director of Vandalism and Coördinator, Pokémon Posse of Sleeper Agents
`The disruption of OSM is our loftiest goal'
Avoid Quality At All Costs!
Make OSM Useless Again!
#Vandalism #Spam #Infighting #HOT-OSM

thanks for the explanation.

regarding the houses, well, that is hard for me to evaluate when none of them are mapped yet. i am again using achavi at
https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=58046248
and i recommend changing the default dark background in the upper right corner to plain `OSM' to best see what is presently mapped.

now from my editor in a different window i can see a significant number of houses in the southwest (that from afar i thought was woods) as well as as more northerly along the west which were partially excluded from the awkward coarse outline. also on the east side i see mostly houses, but i also see that on the north and east the grounds outline was tied to the centre of the roads, so i don't expect much attention to detail.

nonetheless, i don't feel that merited deletion of the other user's work, which is very demoralising to them, particularly without making an effort to replace it with somethig better. it would have been possible to fine-tune the lower left as well as the upper left with little difficulty, with a bit of care, to much more closely follow the probable grounds outline - i cannot see a fence like elsewhere i traced.

in any case, it may have seemed easier to delete the old outline and replace it, but the latter half of that did not occur, and rather than having a coarse outline present, instead there is none, no easy way to see the general area a school can be found.

(I won't comment on the quality of the northwest outline of the high school building outline other than to note it also is not true to the physical building outline and includes some non-building as well)

Now to Johnny Mapperseed's outline, it appears to exclude the houses and follow the grounds outline that i see, presuming that scrubby bit of forest is part of the school grounds.

I see no evidence of any public park, nor a pool, within the grounds outline. The Community Pool and attached park i do find between the two outlines is well outside them both.

There are differing attitudes to mapping trees, or, well, anything. There are actually quite a few municipal governments that have made their tree data records available to be imported into OSM, and because someone, somewhere, will probably have an interest to map something and make that data available via OSM.

If i recall, there was discussion about an issue with one of these imports today (your time, technically yesterday for me). I was hoping to find a good example of how that data appears in OSM, but i guess i will have to settle for
osm.org/#map=18/48.20047/16.36827&layers=N
which doesn't have that much, but hey, that is official data their government is working to keep up-to-date.

What does not make sense to you to map, makes sense to someone of the many thousands of governments and businesses that are relying on osm data and contributing to it. you may not see a need to map private house driveways, or even houses, but there are several firms who have a business need for it and are paying to have that data be added, even though there are others who feel such private info does not belong on the map, take matters into their hands, and purge that unsightly data.

i probably would secretly be happy if all the highway info were deleted as i have no use for it; all i need are the fountains and benches i've mapped and the shops with cheap beer. but that is not the point of osm, so instead i work to preserve the data from anyone for anyone.

About the tree rendering in Wien above, the reason it was difficult for me to find trees was that a decision was made some time ago that making trees visible was unimportant, so they do not appear unless you zoom in very close. just like public toilets (which i should have mentioned above as important to me as well) and now bancomats which only appear at the closest level, when really, if the nearest WC is 5km away, i want to be able to see it at almost all levels of detail.

the same should be true for your navigation app - you should be able to select what should appear and how prominently and what to ignore, as ever more useful detail gets added, as well as useless to you info.

essentially, the rules i would pass along on me deathbed are to respect the data as being important to someone, respect the work and contributions of other mappers, improve rather than destroy, help other mappers out (unless they are peronally known to you in which case let the edit wars commence), don't edit the map with maps.me, make potlatch 1 your default editor, and never ever let yourself get as addicted as i, lest you never be able to sleep normally again.

is this long enough yet?

cheers

checks changeset number...
pops it into
https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=49732750

no, this is the right changeset - the aerial imagery i used was Mapbox, which you can select under
osm.org/edit?changeset=49732750#map=18/41.36462/-81.44330
as it is probably the sharpest of all imageries.

i probably did not express meself well above, though.

that was as far as i went reviewing your changes, as i was satisfied you were not systematically damaging things ;-)

i put a few quatloos on lack of awareness of mapping areas for, oh, pedestrian zones is what i see most.

since i've never bothered, i don't know if an area=yes with a polygon here will both fill out the renderer for the service drive (wait, yes, i have seen it somewhere, where it blotted out a building in the middle) and also fulfill the neediness of routing engines that seem to be getting maximum attention these days.

worth a try...

hallo nochmal

here you have deleted a connection road that is present in TIGER 2018, and plainly visible with detached accompanying pedestrian pavement, even if it appears there may be an access barrier for motorised vehicles. this had recently been added to the map.

can i ask your motivation in deleting this when it is clearly seen to be present, and apears to give access to an unmapped track? unless the imagery is two years outdated...

tanks

Hallo, me again...

after reading you mention a hiatus, i had to check your other changesets to see if your recent deletions were a one-off.

first, can you please use descriptive changeset descriptions - `changes with local NEO knowledge' means absolutely *nowt* to me, and means i have to look into a changeset where, had you instead written, `added building tag to amenity' your intent would have been clear, and if something went horribly wrong, it would be obvious.

anyway, i have a problem with this changeset, which can be visualised at
https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=58046248
to see it is again almost completely deletions.

the first two ways below i checked looking at their histories, looks very much like the sort of vandalism that accompanies pokemon go cheating.

can you explain what is your reasoning behind deleting the school grounds? this is the established way in osm that an educational institution is represented.

secondly, it appears you have taken an axe to a lot of trees along aurora road, again added by mapper TweedC. do they really no longer exist?

the only non-deletion per se i see is where you removed the name Shell from an auto repair shop, so if you were not intending to do what i see you have done here, then this can probably be reverted without conflicts despite its age, as i can see looking at the map to the right, there is no indication there are two school grounds at the bottom.

fear not, even though it is not efficient for me, i will continue looking through your changesets for further damage.

(if i am seeming somewhat confused or unclear, it is because i have been unable to get more than a few minutes of sleep the last days, and it is catching up on me, and i apologise)

thanks

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/65559642 where the changeset comment is: delete Yet Another bogus maps.me chalet, with the low quality of maps.me accuracy, this is as unlikely as a castle or alpine hut or any of the other common tagging abuses

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/65559602 where the changeset comment is: delete Yet Another bogus maps.me chalet, with the low quality of maps.me accuracy, this is as unlikely as a castle or alpine hut or any of the other common tagging abuses

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/65559538 where the changeset comment is: delete Yet Another bogus maps.me chalet, with the low quality of maps.me accuracy, this is as unlikely as a castle or alpine hut or any of the other common tagging abuses

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/65559472 where the changeset comment is: delete Yet Another bogus maps.me wilderness hut in the middle of a big city, osm only maps factual things that really exist

(a good place to see the density of detail-free residences and other buildings is in Nepal, where i found meself before returning here, by the way)

As i expected, the outline of the large Ford building corresponds well enough to the sales lot, so as i thought, it was a simple beginner mistake. the same mapper traced an outline of the neighbouring Enterprise auto-rental just west, but failed to add a building= tag to that, so its outline does not appear rendered to the right of these comments, only the icon.

user TweedC should have donated the building tag from the sales lot (which i dont know how to properly tag whether active, or a simple paved lot), to that rental office.

also, before considering deleting an item, please look into the lifecycle prefix, as that will notify armhair mappers like myself that the aerial imagery i used to check, no longer reflects the current revision of reality.

thanks.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/65556784 where the changeset comment is: restore deleted objects at the request of the mapper, resulting from a misunderstanding of osm and its guiding principles that we all hold most holy and sacred and devote ourselves tirelessly to occasionally bothering to think about doing something for

i'd give the ford one a closer look before deleting, it may well be meant to represent the carpark or business boundary.
your revert is underway.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/65554408 where the changeset comment is: delete Yet Another bogus maps.me castle as personal residence

the way osm works is that if something exists on the ground, it should be mapped.

if there is a reason to prevent access to a track or path, there are access tags that will indicate the legal status, as well as other tags to describe the condition of the trail. both of these will serve to prevent apps sending people onto the now-deleted-yet-existing roads.

when you say it is dangerous, remember it works two ways. if a track is visible, it's highly likely that someone without map guidance, like myself, will check it out, like i used to take a different way through the woods each time from one town to another just to explore the possibilities.

when they run into trouble, then there will now be nothing on the map to aid emergency responders in reaching the injured. that osm around me is so detailed and includes everything has resulted in emergency services preferring it as reference when responding, a status which would not have been reached without constant vigilance between some who want to restrict what osm can include, and those who want to keep it an accurate representation of the world with all its complexities.

the random tracks i checked were untouched import from the census TIGER data, which is known for its mediocre quality, such as positional inaccuracy and failure to include access tags or precise categorisation. rather than delete this governent data, mappers have been undertaking the herculean task to improve it when shown to be deficient, again a reason to respect the mapping work of others to improve the map, rather than deleting what happens to be inconveniently truthful that you might wish would disappear in reality if deleted from the map.

again, access=private or access=no would be fully adequate to cover the tracks that are off-limits to the general public.

you are wrong.

it is the eventual goal of osm to map every building and address throughout the world, for one. some areas are much further along, while most of the US is lagging maybe a decade or more behind.

your changeset as visualised consists solely of deletions, so it would be possible for me to restore everything with no damage. i would be happy to do that.

there was only one obviously wrong thing that you deleted, a large building which should have been some area, named Ford; mistakes like that can and should be deleted or better, fixed to be correct.

look around other parts of the country or the world for examples of how the us map will be looking in the coming years as more and more detail gets added.

the buildings without details will eventually get more details like address and more added to them, as osm contributors build upon the work of those who have mapped before them.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/65526372 where the changeset comment is: Please use your HOTosm projects only for mapping things that really exist, not as your own personal playground, thanks

anything that is only temporary for such a short time should not be added to OSM, which should refer to longer and stable business presences.

By the time maps.me updates its data so the shops first are rendered, will probably be up to a month from now, after which will appear a flood of delete requests by maps.me users who are not able to find the temporary features.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/65523224 where the changeset comment is: turning carparks and buildings into residential areas as well as drawing random roads is vandalism of map data, therefore reverted to ensure integrity of the map for its many users.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/65520225 where the changeset comment is: delete Yet Another bogus maps.me viewpoint