User talk:Something B

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

reason for depreciated tag

Hello, can you please always add the source of any depreciated tag you add to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Deprecated_features ? --Marc marc (talk) 21:54, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, @Marc marc! Typically it is https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Tag_descriptions_with_status_"deprecated" Regards, Something B. Something B (talk) 21:58, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Properties group

Hi, following this modification, you moved usage=irrigation in properties group. Aren't all OSM keys properties? I don't get what sense it makes instead of waterways.
Could you elaborate a bit more please? Fanfouer (talk) 20:56, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

A canal is a kind of waterway. "Usage" is not a kind of waterway, it is what it is used for. Something B (talk) 21:06, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Purpose of groups is not to state a feature is something or not but a feature relates to something. It's like wiki categories grouping both features and attributes pages.
I don't get what value properties group can have. Fanfouer (talk) 21:53, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Strictly speaking, usage=irrigation is not limited to waterways. It can also apply to pipelines and reservoirs. Something B (talk) 21:59, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
We'll possibily have to rename waterways category to Water management and a waterway could actually go through a pipeline with waterway=pressurised. Currently, category's page includes reservoir and many marine features Fanfouer (talk) 00:03, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
Good idea! Something B (talk) 00:07, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

man_made=wastewater_basin

Hi SomethingB,

I working in the sewage treatment industry and got some questions on your proposal.

May I contact you through e-mail?

Best wishes,

--Belmondo (talk) 14:01, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi, @Belmondo! This is not really proposal, rather documenting the tag that is being used. @ZeLonewolf and @ 501ghost are currently working on the proposal. See Proposed_features/Clarifiers_and_Oxidation_Ditches Something B (talk) 21:53, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Chat with us

Are you up on OSM World Discord or OSM US Slack? --ZeLonewolf (talk) 00:23, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi, @User:ZeLonewolf! No, I don't use them. But if it is necessary, then I can; however, the easiest way to contact me is to send me a private message via osm.org (my username in OSM and Wiki is the same). I also read the OSM forum and sometimes write there. Something B (talk) 21:16, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
Oh ok no worries. Based on the edits your were making, I thought you might have been one of the folks in the discussions on the OSM World Discord. Just trying to figure out who's who. Some things are just easier to work out in chat :) --ZeLonewolf (talk) 21:20, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Renderings for toilets and showers

Hi, thanks for your great work on the privacy and gender proposals! Have you considered rendering suggestions for the various combinations? I think that would be a bit of work but also really cool. --Martianfreeloader (talk) 10:41, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps different colors. The size of the icons (osm-carto 16 px, for example) imposes restrictions. If you have any ideas, I'll gladly add them to the propozal (as informative sections, of course). Something B (talk) 22:00, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
I do have some ideas but haven't created any icons yet. Anyways, maybe that's for a separate future proposal. --Martianfreeloader (talk) 09:47, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Used Browser

Referring to your post in the voting: 

Minimum browser requirements of new forum are high. The mailing list is much simpler.

Please what kind of browser do you use? Discourse requires a common browser. Certain browsers are disabled for security/functional reasons. However, those that cannot use Discourse should not be used for IT security reasons. --SafetyIng (talk)

Google Chrome 64.0.3282.137 Something B (talk) 10:27, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, but this is so old. This version is from 2018(!) Currently Chrome would be at 106.0.5249.92. I took the trouble to count how many vulnerabilities have been fixed since your version: about 1500. --SafetyIng (talk) 10:38, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
I will try to update the browser. But the prospect of losing the opportunity to submit proposals is a little frustrating. :-( Something B (talk) 10:47, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

add a comment for wiki change

Hello, can you please add a comment to describe a change in the wiki ? it help a lot when trying to find who made a change about a topic for ex https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3ADeprecated_features&type=revision&diff=2456444&oldid=2452041 need to be show and read to understand what's about or not. Regards, Marc marc (talk) 12:53, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

This change disables red links. Something B (talk) 21:21, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Something B! It would be helpful to me if you could add edit comments on edits like changing status or applying deprecated templates because I continuously look in the histories of tags before I adjust a tag description or data item. -- Regards, Chris2map (talk) 14:19, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. Something B (talk) 14:23, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Something B! And while you're agreeing, would you please add an edit comment when changing statuses and things like that as well? --Chris2map (talk) 16:59, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I have to repeat myself. I ask again to use editing comments! --Chris2map (talk) 21:01, 20 October 2025 (UTC)
It is really necessary? Because good comments can't prevent bad edits, and if someone wants review, he/she should check difference anyway. Something B (talk) 08:44, 21 October 2025 (UTC)
Yes, for me it is really necessary. On the one hand it is good wiki practice, heeded by most users, and should apply to everyone in the same way. On the other hand it is necessary to be able to search for changes if you have to track changes and developments, e.g. in connection with deprecations, deletion requests, image usage, description changes, and so on. --Chris2map (talk) 10:37, 21 October 2025 (UTC)
I also think it's very useful: finding out when a tag was deprecated is extremely quick when the tag name is in the history, but very time-consuming when there are no comments. Furthermore, it is sometimes very difficult to understand which came first in the changes (the tag page is sometimes changed after being added to the list, sometimes the opposite, and sometimes it is a contributor's decision without collective discussion). Furthermore, comments allow certain changes to be made if desired (e.g. improving wording). Marc marc (talk) 13:23, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

Tag:man_made=lamp

Hi SomethingB
You have changed the status on the page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag%3Aman_made%3Dlamp&type=revision&diff=2449431&oldid=2449211
The status was set to "rejected" because the page is based on a proposal that was abandoned because there was no consensus and was replaced by a new proposal.
If you read the note before the "Table of contents" it says: “Note that this proposal has been abandoned in favour of a new, improved tagging scheme which is designed to fix minor inconsistencies and problems in this proposal.”
This new proposal: “https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Key:light_source” Tags with wide usage (more 80000) and in its presentation note it says “This proposal is a follow-up and restructured improvement of the previous lamp proposal. It completely replaces this old proposal and introduces a new tagging scheme instead.”
But it remained at the proposal stage, without going to the vote
It seems to me that this status "in use" on your page is not adequate and the page should also indicate : the proposal Proposed_features/Tag:man_made=lamp has been abandoned. Since then, the proposal has been replaced by another proposal ...
Regards, leni (talk) 19:15, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

man_made=lamp still in use and not deprecated. If tag still in use, not approved and not deprecated it should be marked as "in use". See Tag status. Something B (talk) 21:34, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Deprecations

Have you overwritten amenity=private_toilet on purpose or by accident?[1] Discostu36 (talk) 16:38, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

It was intentional. I added amenity=private_toilet earlier without discussion, and now removed it. Something B (talk) 16:42, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

natural=grass deprecated?

Where was this discussed? It's not mentioned in the deprecated features page. It's wrong to assume this tag has been used synonymously with natural=grassland.--DaveF63 (talk) 14:12, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Can you tell me the difference between these two? Something B (talk) 14:18, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
I'm unsure if there is, but that not my point. You're presuming every occurrence of the natural=grass tag was added in error instead of grassland. To presume that is wrong. In many instances it is used instead of landuse=grass. Was the depreciation discussed anywhere?
--DaveF63 (talk) 19:11, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
I changed the status to "in use". In any case, automatic edits should be discussed separately. Also, natural=grassland and landuse=grass are simular. -- Something B (talk) 19:19, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
No, they're not.--DaveF63 (talk) 19:41, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
I reverted the controversial edit. -- Something B (talk) 21:12, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Most of the street_cabinet=* tags are deprecated now (see your change here)?

Where was this discussed? I cannot find any information on the Wiki page for street_cabinet=* or that there was a new proposal or a discussion to replace these tags you added in the template (e.g. street_cabinet=power). I also searched for proposals for the keys street_cabinet=* and utility=* and couldn't find anything. Now there are many many Osmose warnings on street_cabinet nodes on my area about deprecated tags. It might make sense to replace street_cabinet=* with utility=* (perhaps), but it should be discussed or decided by a proposal. And perhaps there are also be good reasons not to replace it (or just add utility=* where it makes sense without removing street_cabinet=* – with acceptance of a redundancy), who knows?

My main question is: Is there any proposal (which I didn't found) or at least any discussion somewhere about that (I did not search in mailing lists for example)?

I am also missing a descriptive comment at your change of the Template:Deprecated features – it would be nice with such profound changes to leave an explanation (with a source!) for such a change. Maybe you can explain it here or undo it if there isn't a good explanation or a community decision. By the way: what's with street_cabinet=traffic_monitoring or street_cabinet=transport_management or street_cabinet=waste (and others)? Should these remain valid, just not others like power/telecom/gas? And do you plan to document this change on the Wiki page of man_made=street_cabinet? All in all that doesn't seem very well thought out and stringent. I also ask because it affects me personally a lot. I currently have > 1500 street cabinets tagged with street_cabinet=power and over 800 with street_cabinet=telecom, just as an example. I don't want to change them without a good reason (but of course I do if there is a good reason based on a community decision). And I'm sure it will also affect other mappers, with more than 90,000 uses of street_cabinet=* and more than 50,000 uses of street_cabinet=power worldwide for example (see Taginfo). --Goodidea (talk) 23:44, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

See Proposed_features/Utility_facilities Something B (talk) 00:02, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for the information ... I really didn't find this proposal when explicitly searching for. Don't know why. A good description in the "Reason" column of the table would have really helped me and saved my time writing this here – the people from the new street parking proposal did a good job for example (eg. deprecation of parking:orientation=*).
And a suggestion that I think makes sense, and maybe you do too: after an approved proposal, I would wait until the corresponding wiki page(s) have been changed before I would enter something in the "Deprecated features" table. Official documentation in a place where you look first is always a good thing ... This usually happens within a few days and then it is much more understandable for all users who are surprised, for example, by numerous new Osmose warnings in the editor. So I would be in favor of this workflow: Approved Proposal > Wiki > Deprecated features instead of Approved Proposal > Deprecated features > Wiki.
I would also be very much in favor of introducing a notice on wiki pages when there is ongoing approval that would result in changes to the particular key if approved - it doesn't have to be a big conspicuous box, a small mark would suffice. Maybe that would also have the side effect that more users would actively participate in a proposal – I didn't know about a proposal that affects street cabinets, for example. (If you then get a notification, for example, if a wiki page you are interesting in and following has been changed by such a note/marking.) --Goodidea (talk) 13:07, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
See also Changelog - it is updated carefully. Something B (talk) 13:11, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
You seem to like the short answers ... Thanks - I didn't know that either. Perhaps you shouldn't assume that every user knows all the possibilities. So a few more words in change comments (or "Reason" columns) is always a good thing ... A change in the workflow here, too – I don't know what you think about it. --Goodidea (talk) 13:19, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Perhaps I should have put a link to the proposal in the edit comment. Regarding the "Reason" column - I think it makes sense to have a relatively small number of reasons, such as: "redundant tag", "incorrect or ambiguous semantics", "significant misuse", etc. Something B (talk) 13:34, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Yes, of course ... that would have been enough ... Yes, citing a source is always very useful—especially in this case which is an important one. This also proves that you didn't just enter something like this in the table (for example, because you personally don't like a key). Goodidea (talk) 13:43, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

New wiki page Tag:healthcare=health_post

Hello, you recently created the wiki page Tag:healthcare=health_post but I suspect this new tag was not discussed. Could you explain this: under "How to map" it says that tags like healthcare=nurse or healthcare=midwife or healthcare=community_health_worker may be used in addition to healthcare=health_post. Does that mean that the key healthcare=* will have multiple values?

Also I think that Tag:healthcare=health_post is redundant as there is already amenity=health_post to indicate the facility. Additional tags healthcare=nurse or healthcare=midwife or healthcare=community_health_worker may be used in addition to amenity=health_post to indicate whether the facility is run by a nurse, a midwife or a community health worker.

-- Privatemajory (talk) 05:10, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Privatemajory!

I just documented a tag that is actually used.

"Does that mean that the key healthcare=* will have multiple values?" No. Something B (talk) 09:58, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

hot_pot and hotpot and hot_dog

Hello, I noticed you move Tag:cuisine=hot_pot to Tag:cuisine=hotpot with a redirect page, can you explain why you make this changes? However, Tag:cuisine=hot_dog left with a underline

I would like to know under what discussion this move was made, thanks！

--快乐的老鼠宝宝 (talk) 22:34, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Due to usage: 590 (hotpot) vs 36 (hot_pot). Something B (talk) 22:40, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Your statement seems to have a basis but is not actually based. If there are more underlined words in the future, do you need to operate the move page again? --快乐的老鼠宝宝 (talk) 23:47, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
You can move page back just now, if You want it. Something B (talk) 10:53, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

paddling pools

Hello,

In https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:swimming_pool&diff=prev&oldid=2463863 you edited Key:swimming pool to recommend leisure=paddling_pool instead of a number of other tags (paddling_pool, children's_pool, and kids). Was there a discussion about this somewhere?

(Also, the line "The following three tags are currently being used pretty interchangeably for the same thing with no clear preference for any option" left remaining immediately above is rather confusing given your change, do you think it should be removed as well?)

Cheers, Jarek Piórkowski (talk) 01:23, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Jarek!
There was no discussion, but I can ask on the mailing list. P.S. The number of occurrences of tags is not always an indicator of their correctness. Something B (talk) 09:24, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

fenced

Please comment at https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/an-18-sided-fence-sports-pitch/98714/23 about this edit. SomeoneElse (talk) 11:44, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

patrolled

Hello, as you see here https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/patrolled#combinations , 'patrolled' is a niche tag related to ski pistes. I created the page recently to improve documentation of this key that otherwise exists for ages (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Piste_Maps ), see this discussion :

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/backcountry-skitour-survey-how-do-you-map/5398

I'm pretty sure deprecating this key on the wiki doesn't help anyone, nor that it was brought to the attention of the small ski-mapping community. Maybe did I missed a discussion? --Yvecai (talk) 04:57, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Removing pictures which don’t have explicit licensing information

Hello Something B, I have replied to the topic where we are discussing your removal of pictures from the wiki: [2] —Dieterdreist (talk) 08:24, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

edit descriptions

Thanks for edits - but it would be nice to describe edits on wiki (see for example https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Ka:Map_Features:highway&curid=46236&diff=2668241&oldid=2597720 ) - like with OSM map edits it is useful to give hint what/why/maybe how something as edited Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 20:38, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

@Something B: Could you please add at least a small hint with your edits ("image C") or something like that? --Chris2map (talk) 17:50, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Removing pictures which don’t have explicit licensing information

Do you think it's OK to remove pictures without warning? It would be nice if you would also make sure that those who use our data without attribution would move. But that's probably a bit more complicated than simply deleting the images from a project. Fredao (talk) 13:45, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Uploaders has been notified in most cases. See Category:Media_without_a_license and User:Mateusz Konieczny/notify uploaders. Something B (talk) 07:43, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

Replacing images for licensing reasons

Your image replacement on NL:Tagging van Nederlandse wegen was rather confusing because you didn't indicate why you replaced the image. Now I figured out you wanted to do this for licensing reasons. If this was clear from the edit summary, I would have looked for a more suitable replacement, and we could have avoided the small edit war. --JeroenvanderGun (talk) 16:00, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

I will always write edit summary in not obvious cases. Thanks! And some info at User:Mateusz_Konieczny/notify_uploaders. Something B (talk) 21:13, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Item / Label

Removing labels, This is the user's opinion: Chris2map 08:01, 22 May 2025 (UTC) ... "I generally leave it up to the users in the respective national community or who are native speakers of the respective language to decide whether or not they want to remove labels." Taken from the thread: Item_talk:Q22387. Then there is a contradiction! --HaPe-CZ (talk) 09:32, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Labels (in this wiki, not in Wikidata) corresponding to key or tag, literally, so should be translated as label, but may be added as aliases. Something B (talk) 09:46, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
@Something B: I gues you wanted to write "should not be translated". – @HaPe-CZ: What contradiction do you mean? I'm with the description on Data items that labels should only be set in English (for key and tag data items). Only, I try to avoid changing things in other languages over the heads of the native speakers and local communities to give them the chance to do it on their own. --Chris2map (talk) 09:57, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
@Chris2map ... Ok --HaPe-CZ (talk) 10:06, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Original image is legitimate - CC BY-SA 2.0

No need to remove images with a valid license such as Original image is legitimate - CC BY-SA 2.0 --HaPe-CZ (talk) 09:09, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

ChangesetKeyDescription

Hi, is the ChangesetKey: namespace being removed? I see you deleted a number of pages in that namespace, but this will break the documentation links on the main OSM website. See openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/pull/5818 GitHub for the current implementation.

The logic is:


but now we have an inconsistency: Pages in the Key: namespace like changesets_count=* are now using Template:ChangesetKeyDescription... --Kylenz 23:51, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

I didn't know about the PR, but I can create redirects or revert the changes. Something B (talk) 07:45, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
I added redirects to Key:* and a ChangesetKeyDescription templates. Something B (talk) 08:22, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
Thanks! any solution is good, I think it should just be decided with the consensus documented somewhere. I recall there was also some incompatibility with taginfo when this namespace was first introduced. The discussion at Talk:Wiki#Documenting_changeset_tags_separately_from_element_tags doesn't say what the conclusion was, maybe we should revive that thread? --Kylenz 08:25, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
Maybe we should do. My point is: key, whether on node (way, relation) or changeset is the same, so no need to duplicate documentation, keeping in one place is much simpler. Something B (talk) 08:35, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
The argument presented in Talk:Wiki#Documenting_changeset_tags_separately_from_element_tags is that the key may have different documentation for changesets vs nodes/ways/relations. For example, created_by=* is discardable on node/way/relation, but effectively mandatory for changesets. Anyway, I'll stay impartial to this debate, i'd just like to reach a consensus, and then adapt the website code GitHub + taginfo if necessary.
p.s. In the future, Notes might also have tags GitHub. In case that affects any decisions. --Kylenz 08:53, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
Main difference is status, but it may be indicated separately with two (as now) or even more templates: one for elements, one for changesets, and potentially, one for notes; on data items, two or more different claims (with "applied to" qualifiers) may be present. Something B (talk) 09:41, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
p.s. type=* effectively deprecated on nodes and ways, but mandatory on relations, so dependent on entity status will be present. Something B (talk) 09:51, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Incomplete editing

When editing the template content, the "description" item, it is also necessary to correct the description in the "Item:Qxxx" description. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:building%3Dworkshop&curid=328541&action=history --HaPe-CZ (talk) 19:52, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

boundary=forest_compartment .. (en-us) description

Hi, could you check the edit boundary=forest_compartment (Q6952) .. (Added [en-us] description: Markita subsekcio di limigita arbaro, qua estas uzata por planado, administrado e navigado.)? I cannot follow it. --Chris2map (talk) 15:19, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

My mistake, fixed. Thanks! Something B (talk) 18:45, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Remove Images

Primarily, it would be desirable to replace bad images. Simply removing content (even if unlicensed) does not help. --HaPe-CZ (talk) 14:29, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

In this case image wasn't sole image in the article, but File:Waste Tips near Kitto's Shaft - geograph.org.uk - 549155.jpg can be replacement. Something B (talk) 12:11, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

Parallamps

Yes. I'm the author of the file. I took a photo.--Xan (talk) 18:46, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

Please, contact uploaders before nominating for deletions, especially active users

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=File:Area_affected_by_landuse_imports.png&diff=prev&oldid=2915501 Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 09:52, 29 November 2025 (UTC)

No problem, I checked user's activity for recent reviews. Something B (talk) 10:49, 29 November 2025 (UTC)
Thanks, and thanks for help with images! I will try to keep up with deletion requests Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 12:09, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

redundant with what?

if file is redundant like https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:20110520_001.jpg - can you put link with what it is redundant? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 12:08, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Prise_type_2_Mennekes_BMW_i3.jpg - different image, but socket of the same type. Something B (talk) 12:45, 18 December 2025 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Something_B&oldid=2931341"