pitscheplatsch's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 171660838 | 3 months ago | ✅ Corrected by changeset/171670840 |
| 171664751 | 3 months ago | ✅ Corrected by changeset/171670612 |
| 171865409 | 3 months ago | Hallo Max, danke für deine Rückmeldung. Ich kann die Begründung zur Löschung nachvollziehen, allerdings habe ich den Eindruck, dass einige der entfernten Wege durchaus sinnvoll gemappt waren. Durch das Tagging war erkennbar, dass es sich nicht um Spazierwege handelt, sondern um hochalpine Routen mit entsprechenden Anforderungen. In OSM mappen wir grundsätzlich alles, was vor Ort sichtbar ist. Wenn also ein Weg erkennbar vorhanden ist, sollte er meines Erachtens auch Teil der Daten sein – unabhängig davon, wie Datenverwerter diese anschließend interpretieren. Dass manche Plattformen die Attribute nicht korrekt berücksichtigen und dadurch Risiken entstehen können, liegt leider nicht in unserem Einflussbereich. Mein Vorschlag wäre, zumindest einen Teil der gelöschten Wege wiederherzustellen und das Tagging dabei noch einmal sorgfältig zu prüfen. Einige der betroffenen Wege wurden erst vor wenigen Monaten eingetragen; wenn sie jetzt gelöscht werden, besteht die Gefahr, dass andere Beitragende sie bald erneut erfassen. Danke & Beste Grüße, Pascal |
| 171470711 | 3 months ago | 👍 Thank you for updating the element changeset/171471587 |
| 171470697 | 3 months ago | ✅ Corrected by changeset/171479980 |
| 171471657 | 3 months ago | 👎 (Partly) Reverted due to lack of response from the original contributor by changeset/171844688 |
| 171483199 | 3 months ago | ✅ Corrected by changeset/171576455 |
| 171484746 | 3 months ago | 👎 (Partly) Reverted due to lack of response from the original contributor by changeset/171844644 |
| 171545158 | 4 months ago | Salut phillyrider, merci pour tes contributions. Le bot est intervenu car tes trois derniers changesets utilisaient le même commentaire très court, qui ne donne pas assez de contexte. Beaucoup de nouveaux ne réalisent pas à quel point le commentaire de changeset est important pour tout le monde sur OSM. Quand un commentaire ne reflète pas précisément les modifications, cela entraîne souvent des vérifications supplémentaires et des échanges inutiles. En règle générale, un bon commentaire de changeset indique brièvement ce qui a changé, la direction (si pertinent), l’ampleur, et — si possible — la source. Des commentaires plus clairs accélèrent la validation et rendent l’historique plus utile par la suite. Merci d’en tenir compte pour tes prochaines contributions. Bien à toi, Pascal --- Hi phillyrider, thanks for mapping. The bot chimed in because your last three changesets all used the same very short comment, which doesn’t give enough context. Many newcomers don’t realize how important the changeset comment is for everyone collaborating on OSM. When a comment doesn’t reflect the actual edits, it often triggers extra review and creates unnecessary back-and-forth. As a rule of thumb, a helpful changeset comment briefly states what changed, direction (if relevant), scope, and—if possible—the source. Clearer comments speed up validation and make the history useful later. Thanks for keeping this in mind for future edits. Best, Pascal |
| 171511223 | 4 months ago | Hello Majed, Thank you for your reply and for explaining the background of your project. I’d like to clarify an important point about OpenStreetMap: the data here is meant to represent the real-world geography as it exists, for everyone’s use. Edits should not be made to fit a particular project’s requirements (such as filtering roads for autonomous cart testing), since this can remove correct data and reduce the map’s usefulness for others. If your project needs a simplified or customized map (for example, only certain roads or areas), the recommended approach is to download the OSM data and process it locally to fit your needs. That way, you can filter or modify the data for your project without affecting the main OSM database. Please restore the deleted features, or let the community know if you need help reverting them. If you’re unsure how, I can guide you to the right resources. Best regards, Pascal |
| 171397569 | 4 months ago | Thank you for your private message and confirming that your deletions were intentional. |
| 171400861 | 4 months ago | Thank you for your private message and confirming that your deletions were intentional. |
| 171283192 | 4 months ago | Thank you for your private message and confirming that your deletions were intentional. |
| 171283072 | 4 months ago | Thank you for your private message and confirming that your deletions were intentional. |
| 171283978 | 4 months ago | Thank you for your private message and confirming that your deletions were intentional. |
| 170803032 | 4 months ago | I guess this is #spam and should be reverted? |
| 170799109 | 4 months ago | I guess this is #spam and should be reverted? |
| 170798869 | 4 months ago | I guess this is #spam and should be reverted? |
| 170792108 | 4 months ago | I guess this is #spam and should be reverted? |
| 165354736 | 4 months ago | I guess this is #spam and should be reverted? |