Talk:OpenStreetMap

message: article of Humanitarian Open Street Map Team was deleted and redirected to Open Street Map. But Humanitarian Open Street Map Team (HOT) is different from OSM.
* OSM maps the worlds with open geodata,
* HOT uses Open Street Map to support disasters, ... and community needs  or other humanitarian needs.
Currently it seems that HOT does not have the relevance in Wikipedia for an own article or due to missing peer-reviewed journals. Which is ok! May be there was something else wrong with the added article about HOT (replaced again with the Redirect). A bit worries me, that alterations were even cleared from history of the HOT redirect page. Good to know that "view history" is not like a history in a Version Control System, roll-back of inappropriate edits are ok anyway and common good practice in Wikipedia and Wikiversity, but who decides if good-faith edits are removed even from the history of the page? previous decisions of curators might also help or support new users to understand about decision about a not letting a separate HOT article evolve by the community - see HOT relevance in Wikipedia! --Bert Niehaus (talk) 15:26, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Humanitarian Open Street Map Team (HOT) 

message: The use of Yahoo! imagery is not the result of a "special agreement", from what I read a Yahoo representative confirmed that using the imagery as a backdrop/overlay for hand editing was within the standard terms of use for the image data. I would be pleased if someone could adjust the article accordingly, I don't have time right now! (Here's a source for my comment from the OSM wiki) —tedp (talk) 13:46, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Even though it took me three edits (one regular and two corrections... I really consider myself a precise worker, always rereading what I write, but somehow...) I think it's a bit more accurate now, at least the section is sourced. — Ewald (talk|email|contrib) 18:36, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yahoo Imagery 

message: The 'website' infobox seems all wrong to me. The infobox should refer to the project and to the idea itself, not to the website or the foundation (important as they are). Is there a better infobox for a project? Can we have a line for the number of contributors? PeterIto (talk) 07:46, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox

message: I think the "Commercial data sources" section is (partly) redundant. It is more like a history section. There is already a section called "History". (Or conversely: some of the History section is redundant.)
What do you think?
--Mortense (talk) 13:31, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description of Automotive Navigation Data's contribution is repeated 

message: In section "Map data": what is the meaning of these 3 lines?:
OpenStreetMap osm
CloudMade osm, garmin
Geofabrik osm, esri
It does not make sense to me.
And should osm be OSM? And garmin be Garmin? And esri be ESRI? (the company http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ESRI ?)
Isn't "OpenStreetMap osm" redundant? (OpenStreetMap 2 times.)
What do you think?
--Mortense (talk) 17:44, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe osm, garmin, and esri refer to file formats Pnorman (talk) 00:02, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should section "Map data" be changed? 

message: WikiProject OpenStreetMap was recently marked as inactive. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 14:41, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject 

message: Boy, is this article complicated! I can understand only a fraction of it. Yours in puzzlement, GeorgeLouis (talk) 21:05, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Huh? 

message: The scale on the usage map goes from 10 million to 2 million.  Someone who knows if it's supposed to be 20 million or if the colors are wrong should fix it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.124.115.34 (talk) 15:13, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The hits for Germany (highest country) in Feb 2011 were 19305525. I'm part of the OpenStreetMap sysadmin team -- Firefishy (talk) 17:36, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  usage map 

message: The OpenStreeMap wiki contains a page set devoted to news about OSM (OpenStreetMap in the media), another for books (Books) and a third for scientific research (Research).  Content of these three pages could be used to enhance the OSM article and/or articles about cartography and open source information movements. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 15:50, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources to enhance article 

message: In the nice-to-have category:
I think financials should be listed. Specifically, links to IRS.gov, not osm.org.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.18.173.102 (talk) 16:15, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Why would irs.gov have financial details for the OpenStreetMap Foundation, which is not a US organisation?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.198.152.54 (talk) 22:46, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: They were probably referring to the fact that non-profit organizations in the U.S. have to submit financial information to the IRS, which can be requested. For an example of such a section, see Wikimedia Foundation#Finances. Indeed it seems UK accounting standards require the same and the OSM Foundation has made their finances available as well. Opencooper (talk) 23:07, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Money

message: Found it in "Map rendering and presentation"/Desktop - do they really use OSM? Richiez (talk) 20:13, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: AFAIK, the Maemo (N900) version indeed uses OSM – at least as an alternative option. I could swear I've read that on a Nokia blog many months ago. I can try to find it but no promises. --KAMiKAZOW (talk) 00:05, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is Nokia's Ovi Maps for Maemo doing in this article? 

message: hi,
as this is a collaborative project like Wikipedia, we should add a section "Map data editing" with some elements and software to edit the map data. At least list Potlatch2, Merkaartor and JOSM. This is much important as Merkaartor and JOSM article are link to this page, where now no informations are given on map editing. In noone has something against, I will add--Efa (talk) 11:33, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map data editing 

message: I added these at the see also section:
* MapDroyd
* OsmAnd
* MapFactor
* NavFree
* CoPilot Live
* Skobbler GPSAndroid-based software using OpenStreeMap data
apprearantly, Google maps is very bad for downloading the maps for offline use, OSM apps seem to be  better but are mostly only for use on Android.
See http://android.stackexchange.com/questions/591/how-to-use-gps-maps-without-an-internet-connection
http://pocketnow.com/2013/07/22/google-maps-offline
I was wondering: perhaps its useful to make an article called Comparison of off-line GPS software. All programs (using different maps -google maps, OSM, ...-) can be mentioned herein, aswell as the OS on which these apps run.
KVDP (talk) 07:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Applications

message: As requested by an unregistered user last year, I've gone through and changed "data" from plural to singular throughout.  IMHO "Data was" sounds much better than "Data were".  Rojomoke (talk) 17:02, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Singular Data 

message: I think the article is in great need of a proper structure. I propose the following structure:
* History: this part is good
* OSM as a dataset: OSM in its narrowest definition is just the dataset
** Data format
** Data storage
** Data license
* OSM as a community: the community around OSM that is adding data to the database, this is a broader definition of OSM
** Contributors: Who are the contributors, stats and stuff
** Data gathering: How is data gathered: surveys, imagery, governmental data, commercial data, ...
** State of the map: as a way to bind the community
* OSM as an ecosystem: The broadest definition of OSM is the entire ecosystem, describing programs made to work with OSM data
** Editor software: software that's meant to edit existing OSM data and upload newly gathered data to the dataset
** Rendering software
** Humanitarian
** Commercial services
** ...
I hope this would bring some sanity to the randomness. --80.200.190.158 (talk) 13:41, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The German version of the article is worth looking at from a structural pov. Note it suffers from a number of the same issues as the English version, particularly too much detail that is completely out of date and IMHO not really interesting, and at best belongs in the history section. In general I would recommend keeping the amount of detail mangeable and not adding tons of references to stuff that is going to outdated tomorrow. I actually quite like the Wikipedia article on Wikipedia, that is more like what this should be. Sorry that I can't help though. SimonPoole (talk) 13:53, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: A new structure would be a vast improvement, but beyond my ability to do.--DThomsen8 (talk) 00:00, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I have revamped the article. I have found suggestions from @Sanderd17 useful. Arjunaraoc (talk) 13:01, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Restructuring of the article 

message: A recent edit added a reference to GNOME Maps as an editing solution, while not wrong, it clearly was a non-NPOV addition, stats on actually used and popular editors can be found here https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Editor_usage_stats (there are no full year 2015 stats, but there is no reason to believe that the popular tools have changed). I would make the edit myself but I'm involved in the developement of one of the more popular OSM editors. SimonPoole (talk) 14:18, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  OSM Editors/Tools 

message: Would the section "State of the Map" be better titled "State of the Map conference"?  I visited the page and from the TOC I though the section would be about the current coverage and quality of the global map.  I was going to be bold, but thought I'd mention it here first, as I don't know if it will mess up any links to sections. Mcstove (talk) 09:46, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stete of the Map section title rename 

message: A long term contributor Serge Wroclawski criticised that  progress of OpenStreetMap  is being hindered by poor technical and political decisions. Some of them include providing just a database when map is needed, unclear usage policies, lack of moderation/review. 
:Added the above section which was removed from the main page, as it could be useful resource. Arjunaraoc (talk) 07:08, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  A database can be reused in other software environments, a rendered map is a final product in the browser. The key of OpenStreetMap is OpenData policy without Commercial Data Harvesting. Asking those questions "Why OpenStreetMap is in trouble?" lets the user assume that there is a trouble using OpenStreetMap. Neutral Point of View (NPOV) means, mentioning PROs and CONs of OSM decisions and features with an appropriate references (e.g. scientific article that analyzes commercial and open geodata resources). If there are mapping feature that constributers would like to have, they can extend LeafletJS, OpenLayersJS or create a plugin for OpenSource GIS like SAGE, GRASS, QGIS, .... convert the existing data in the desired format --Bert Niehaus (talk) 15:57, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I've read Wroclawski's post back then and I appreciated it as it summarised several points discussed over a number of years. It's a good introduction to matters of perennial discussion within the OSM community, but it's a bit hard to consume for outsiders. The list of topics could be used as a hint to find other secondary sources which discuss them, though. Nemo 16:19, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism of OpenStreetMap 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:52, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: OpenHistoricalMap currently redirects to this article, which contains only a brief mention of that sister project. I've started a draft of a more complete article about OpenHistoricalMap. I invite those familiar with the project to help to make it more well-rounded and rigorously sourced. Minh Nguyễn 💬 22:04, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  OpenHistoricalMap draft article 

message: The redirect Emerillon (software) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Utopes (talk / cont) 06:45, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Emerillon (software)]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: The redirect FoxtrotGPS has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Utopes (talk / cont) 07:03, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:FoxtrotGPS]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: It is very difficult to understand why this article contains essentially C&P marketing material from a competing organisation (see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=OpenStreetMap&diff=1127733186&oldid=1127621353). While linking to an appropriate source in a section on similar and competing organisations could be appropriate, surely using this article to promote the OMF isn't. SimonPoole (talk) 08:29, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overture Maps Foundation marketing copy