Dear ACGG, when you want to import third-party data into OSM you need to discuss this with the community first and provide proper source information. This import was not only not discussed, it was also buggy. See: osm.wiki/Import/Guidelines

Ich habe diese Gebäude jetzt wieder gelöscht, da die Quelle fragwürdig ist und der Benutzer sich durch Accountlöschung weiterer Kommunikation entzogen hat. (DWG Ticket#2024021810000168)

Hallo worker12, ich bin nicht sicher, ob die "name"-Tags, die Du verwendest, eine gute Idee sind, sie sind ja sehr deskriptiv - wir schreiben an einen Spielplatz auch nicht name=Spielplatz dran. Ich habe das Thema mal hier im Communityforum angesprochen https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/namensgebung-schutzzonen-tirol/109356 - vielleicht behältst Du die Diskussion dort mal im Auge oder beteiligst Dich auch daran.

Dear user Zemlemer-Geodesist, please specify your source more precisely than just "imagery". The standard aerial imagery layers avaialable to OSM do not seem to support your very detailed drawing of woodland. Also note that natural=wood is to be used for actual forests, not small groups of trees in a public park!

Your quirky changeset comments are misleading; "traced woods in garden square on Raumskaya street" is sufficient.

OSM documents the names that are presently used, not the names that are historically correct. With many other things it is easy, you just look at the signs, sadly water bodies tend not to have signs. DWG is not taking a position on what the "correct" name is for this body of water, we just ask that any change in naming is a result of community consultation and not a result of looking at archives. So the right way to go about changing the name of this water body is opening a discussion on community.openstreetmap.org, presenting your reasoning there and inviting others to comment. Then if a consensus is found, the name can be changed with a pointer to that discussion. Any name change that does not point to a community discussion supporting that change, will be reverted.

The "all of you" was including you though, LockOnGuy ;)

The DWG has received complaints about this changesets saying that someone's privacy was violated and/or there have been death threats. I think these claims are a wild over-reaction; as far as I can see, the places mentioned here have several hundred thousand inhabitants so "mapper X lives in city Y" is not really telling anyone anything new. Please don't waste DWG's time by organising smear campaigns against individuals. If you cannot work together for the best of OSM, then all of you should leave OSM and make room for people who can.

Hallo MappSurfer, Du bist öfters schon mit der Community über das Mapping abgebauter Bahngleise in Konflikt geraten. Nun hast Du mit way/1246995806 wieder ein abgebautes Bahngleis gemappt besitzt noch dazu die Dreistigkeit, per "note"-Tag zu fordern: "Abgebaute oder überbaute Eisenbahngleise; bitte NICHT löschen, sonder abandoned oder razed taggen."

Überbaute Gleise haben in OpenStreetMap nichts zu suchen. Es muss vor Ort irgendwas von dem Gleis erkennbar sein, sonst wird es nicht gemappt. Punkt, aus, Ende. Manchmal kann man darüber streiten, was genau noch "zu sehen" ist, und da kann man mal ein Auge zudrücken und ein Gleis mappen, das nur noch Leute mit dem richtigen Blick dafür als solches erkennen. Aber spätestens wenn es überbaut ist, gehört das Ding aus OSM rausgeworfen. Ich habe das erwähnte Gleis jetzt nicht gelöscht, weil ich nicht vor Ort bin, habe aber Dein "note"-Tag geändert auf "bitte löschen, wenn nicht mehr vor Ort sichtbar". So entspricht es den Gepflogenheiten bei OSM.

An Diskussionen mit anderen Mappern sehe ich, dass Du manchmal absichtlich alte Luftbilder verwendest, um inzwischen abgebaute Bahngleise davon abzuzeichen. Bitte tue das nicht; wir werden diese Daten wieder löschen.

Historische Eisenbahnen sind ein faszinierendes Thema, und die Plattform openhistoricalmap.org bietet eine ausgezeichnete Möglichkeit, sie einzuzeichnen.

Dass "railway=razed"-Objekte aus OSM derzeit auf der "OpenRailwayMap" angezeigt werden, ist ein Problem; die "OpenRailwayMap" sollte diese Daten besser aus der "OpenHistoricalMap" laden, weil sie, wie gesagt, nach OSM nicht gehören.

Das hier ist eine amtliche Ansage der DWG und wird unter Ticket#2024012310000212 gespeichert.

Dear mrpacmanmap, you have added maxspeed information to 1237 highway objects in Sandwell citing "sandwell.activemap.co.uk" as your source. This web site, however, says "Copyright © 2024 Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council. All rights reserved." Can you clarify?

Dear TawhidAhmad, I'm afraid the quality of your contributions has not improved since I commented on an edit of yours in changeset/144954530 - you are now labelling your edits a "quick flythrough of arterial roads" without even mentioning that this is 100% sidewalk mapping. You write that you are "focusing on crossing tags" but I see nothing of the sort. What I see instead are micro sidewalks like
way/1241398409 way/1241398410 way/1241398411 which certainly ought to have been merged into one (other mappers have partly cleaned up after you but this is an example of poor mapping that remains). If you must map sidewalks in residential neighbourhoods, at least try not to create work for other mappers.

You deleted over 500 POIs in this edit, and claim it is a "personal project". Have all these POIs ceased to exist in reality?

Sorain, this is not about me or my biography, it is about railway=razed which says: "Avoid mapping former railways if it is impossible to determine the former route from the ground or aerial imagery". If this is the rule you are following then everything is fine.

Hi there, when adding names to soccer pitches, please specify your source for that information. Also please ensure that the soccer pitch actually carries that name, and that you are not erroneously claiming that the name of the club was identical to the name of the pitch.

I have undeleted the things deleted by Tolani001 now. This accidentally included a few buildings that Tolani001 himself re-added after deleting them, so they were now there twice, and I deleted them again... all should be good now. @Tolani001, if at all possible please do not delete a building and re-draw it, instead modify the existing building if corrections are necessary. This ensures we keep the history.

I'll have look and undelete the roads.

Dear user OrDal, in this changeset you re-instated two areas deleted by another user. I am letting the Sinai-Gaza Strip Buffer Zone stand (see comment in changeset/147355744), mostly because it has been there for a long time. As for the "Terror Prevention Isolation Area", I tend so - at this point in time - side with 3la2_ka; I don't think Israel has the right to define "Terror Prevention Isolation Areas" in other countries; this is most likely an artifact of current war efforts, and unlikely to remain in this form for longer. It is especially problematic to have a mapper from Israel map such a zone outside of Israel's country borders. Like we do in similar conflicts around the world, I recommend to let the matter rest until hostilities have ended.

Hello 3la2_ka, in this changeset you have removed a buffer zone from OSM that has been in the database for over 4 years, i.e. long before the current conflict erupted. OpenStreetMap does not require nation states to "approve" edits; it is the community who needs to agree on things. I am reverting your deletion now because if something has been in OSM for four years and edited my multiple people, I assume that there is some truth to it. If you feel that this area should be deleted, please discuss this on community.openstreetmap.org and refer to the outcome of that discussion before you delete it again. -- Thank you, Frederik Ramm of OSMF Data Working Group, handling this as
Ticket#2024021210000286

A temporary block was placed on this account due to the large number of deleted objects. I am reverting this changeset now. The account is unblocked but please take care not to perform similar deletions in the future.

I have reverted this changeset because OSM has its own rules about what can and cannot be mapped, and military airfields can definitely be mapped. Deleting them from OSM is vandalism - DWG Ticket#2024021110000171

Dear Sorain, user "alexnder" is correct, and your 15 years of mapping are not an excuse to map non-existent features in OSM. The community differs in their interepretation of "railway=razed" but it is absolutely clear that once a former railway line has been built over, then there is no place for it in OSM anymore - not as "abandoned", not as "disused", and not as "razed". I have removed a few of your razed railway lines where it was obvious from imagery that new buildings had been constructed on top. Please do not map things that no longer exist. If you find any guidelines anywhere that tell you to add such lines even under shopping malls, then please help OSM by editing these guidelines accordingly. Thank you - Frederik Ramm, OSMF Data Working group, handling this as ticket
Ticket#2024021110000135