Hallo Pathumthani, ich habe den Parkplatz an der Alpe Stubental gelöscht, weil sich die Betreiber bitterlich bei uns beschwert haben, der Weg sei für PKW verboten und der Parkplatz nicht existent, und das blaue "P" auf der OSM-Karte würde Autofahrer verleiten, verbotenerweise den Weg zu befahren. Jetzt weiss ich natürlich nicht, ob die mir einen Bären aufgebunden haben - oder ob der Parkplatz vielleicht vor 4 Jahren noch öffentlich war?

Dear kilgor, please use better changeset comments than just "update". See osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments for details!

Dear user raycock, in this changeset you have added lots of street names that are 100% identical to what Google Maps has. In some areas Google is missing names on some streets, and in these areas you have added names to all streets except those missing on Google. This makes the explanation "I was there on a survey" very unlikely.

I understand how it can be frustrating not to have a name to add to a road you have traced from imagery, but please resist the urge to violate Google's copyright; you must not copy names from Google maps, or else you risk to tarnish OSM's reputation as a whole (and needless to say, that of your original contributions as well).

In at least one other situation you have added a point of interest that is still on Google Maps but long closed in reality, which also is suspicious and cannot be explained by a bona fide survey.

Please stick to legal sources in the future, and properly name your sources when uploading (write "survey" as a source when you have surveyed the area in person but please be honest here - looking things up on Google is not a "survey").

I will have to withdraw some of your recently added names from OSM.

siehe auch changeset/148728960

Der in diesem Changeset eingezeichnete Wendekreisel way/1263205395 ist unsinnig und nicht vom Luftbild gestützt. Er wurde vom User "thobrist" daher schon einmal in changeset/148374578 enfternt. Ich werde ihn jetzt erneut entfernen und bitte darum, auf eine Neueinzeichnung zu verzichten.

Dear traveleditor, it would be great if you could apply your mapping skills to where you're at home. Don't copy data from IDF's website or other sources documenting the ongoing conflict. Also make sure to always specify your data source, it is hardly going to be "survey" for the 20-odd place names you have added in this changeset.

Many buildings apparently re-drawn in changeset/151952803 - please write better changeset comments so that people know what your intentions are.

In this changeset you deleted a large number of buildings which still seem to exist according to available aerial imagery. Your changeset comment gives absolutely no explanation for the deletion of over 100 buildings. Is this a mistake?

Is way/1274557269 (a oneway street that cannot be entered) really an unclassified road or maybe just a left-over part of a construction site?

way/119696984 certainly doesn't look like a "primary_link"?

I have removed way/1286748121 again as there was nothing there that would support the intersection layout you mapped.

Can you explain (or fix) the intermingling of way/1286177044 and way/968371094 in osm.org/#map=19/38.64239/21.45338?

Please clarify what the comment "eo6 e76 a3 a5fwegh" means.

Dear TVGRECCE, the addition of two ramps way/1286988244 and way/1286988246 is not supported by aerial imagery. I will remove them again. Please only add ramps like this if there is physical separation between the indivdiual lanes.

Also, when deleting large amounts of data, please provide an explanation in the changeset comment (you put "a").

Dear itsmohdx, your recent edits have broken a few boundaries. I have repaired the damage but please be more careful in the future. Thank you!

Sigmatoja, please use a more respectful tone in discussions. "gówno mnie obchodzi" or (from a different changeset discussion) "No i chuj" is not how we talk to each other in OSM, and the DWG will suspend your editing privileges if that happens again. (Ticket#2024051810000261)

Hello, in this changeset you have added just 6 structures which claim to be parking garages but most of them use over 200 nodes. Please remember that OSM's precision is only +/-10cm anyway so there's no need to add that level of detail. Also, these structures are not visible on ESRI imagery which leaves your claimed source of "field survey"; may I inquire just how you conducted a field survey here that ended up in such precision? Is it possible that you are copying from building plans?

Hello there, in this changeset you have added over one hundred mini grass areas using something like 8000 nodes in total. Please don't do that; grass areas of just a few square metres are not of interest to OSM and larger areas should be modeled as one large area, not dozens of smaller ones. Also, don't place a source tag on every single object, the source tag on the changeset itself is sufficient.

Thanks for looking into this! I think there might have been a misunderstanding between me and the complainant. Initially they wrote it was a "gravel road" unsuitable for HGVs. Now they wrote it was "paved"! Which definitely seems to align with the imagery you have dug up. Apparently the problem is that routing engines recommend turning off the US61 here, and going via Veterans road onto US36, rather than using the Hannibal junction. Maybe it is a case of missing speed limits.