piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Leo Slager (2018-08-24 17:53:42+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2018-08-24 13:58:17+00:00): also this is a bad edit, please read this. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/True_Offset_Process
theres a misalignment in the satellite imagery
keithonearth (2018-08-24 13:44:39+00:00): I debated about doing this edit, because it is a significant change, but in the end can see no reason for the coast to continue as far upstream as it had been. Also it seems contradictory to have the river centre line mapped as a `waterway=river` while the banks are `natural=coastline`. 

This edit does change the rendering, slightly to my surprise, most noticeably with areas of mud and water rendered less prominently, but still visible.

I've done my best to maintain the edit history's of the various ways that had made up the river bank, despite needing to divide and recombine them to make them into circular ways. 

Overall I'm confident this edit is beneficial. As long as I didn't make any dumb mistakes.
Colin Smale (2018-08-25 19:46:10+00:00): Please review the definition of coastline, and then revert these changes.
Remember OSM is not the map you see, it is about the underlying database. Fiddling with the tagging to give the rendering effect you desire is frowned upon, as you probably know...
Was your debate purely with yourself? If you want to make such significant changes, debating with local users is the way to go.
keithonearth (2018-08-29 17:53:20+00:00): Although I did mention the effects to rendering, my change was specifically with the goal of improving the underlying database. I tagged a riverbank as a riverbank, not for rendering reasons, but because it more effectively reflects reality.

I apologise if I've broken a UK mapping convention. I did check how other local rivers were tagged ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5557215 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/3344879 ) and found the riverbanks tagged as expected, but didn't investigate beyond those those two randomly selected rivers.

I have reviewed the definition of coastline, and do not see anything about tagging tidal rivers as coastlines. Perhaps you could specifically say what it was you wanted me to take away from reading it?

This edit also removed the (meta)relation "Great Britain (6038068)" from the riverbank, because as it was tagged as coastline, it was included in this relation. Somehow suggesting that the bridges in Totnes pass over international waters.... That not right.

To say that the sea goes all the way to the weir in Totnes (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/619340695) is inaccurate, and misleading. Although yes, the tidal effect can be seen this far. I would suggest using the `waterway=riverbank` tag in combination with the `tidal=yes` tag would more accurately reflect the real situation. I'd be only too happy to add the tidal tag to the riverbank ways.

I also will point out that we are not debating the location of the mouth of the River Dart, as I have not changed that. The `waterway=river` way has been left unchanged, and I have maintained the existing location chosen to terminate this waterway.

I'm sorry if I've made a mistake, but I have yet to hear a clear argument why my edit is a mistake.
keithonearth (2018-08-30 15:01:33+00:00): I posted a question to help.osm.org here: https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/65629/

Please feel free to explain your rational there. Additionally if there is any documentation of this convention to tag rivers as sea-coasts I'd really appreciate you providing a link.
Joseph E (2018-09-06 04:44:06+00:00): I believe you should revert the change.

We discussed this on the Tagging mailing list: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-September/038912.html

One comment from Christoph Hormann: "The coastline closure there is both below the lower limit of the proposal and below the the range i 
can imagine a meaningful coastline closure rule to allow."
...
"That is largely not really an estuary but more of a ria.  I have no data for this at hand but you can likely see an abrupt change in the elevation profile near Totnes where the submerged section of the former river valley starts.  So in this case it would make a lot of sense to place the coastline closure near the upper end of the tidal section because this is much better defined in terms of physical geography."

Also, on the GP tagging list this issue was discussed recently: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2018-August/021885.html (and following messages):

"The wiki suggests the coastline should be
the high water line going up to the tidal limit (often a lock or a wier) but this can be a substantial distance inland. This is AIUI the general scientific approach." - Colin Smale

"The River Dart  [Way: 194211894 waterway= riverbank] is a really arbitrary line across the river from Dartmouth Castle, this offends my view of what a coastline is." -TonyS999

Please fix this
rskedgell (2018-11-30 21:07:37+00:00): Reverted vandalism, changeset #65058076
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2018-08-24 13:52:49+00:00): why did you delete the fence at the park of Santa Luzia? Theres a fence surrounding the park doesnt it?
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2018-08-24 13:54:18+00:00): also near Praça do Povo, that is not a park, its grass. please be careful when you edit, do avoid deleting quality data and adding bad data. will revert this changeset
manihck (2018-08-24 13:56:31+00:00): Dear Nuno, I made a mistake on the Sta. Luzia park. I was trying to add the gate and ended up removing the fence.
manihck (2018-08-24 14:03:16+00:00): Regarding the changes I've made to the Park near Praça do Povo, I can't agree with you. It isn't grass. It is actually a recreational area with different kinds of plants, benches and small pedestrian passages. It even received a monument recently. So if you could please revert the area to a park again, it would be more accurate than grass.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2018-08-24 14:07:49+00:00): please read the definition of park https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dpark
manihck (2018-08-24 14:14:05+00:00): The link you provided actually supports what I've writeen before. 
"A park is an area of open space provided for recreational use, usually designed and in semi-natural state with grassy areas, trees and bushes. Parks are often but not always municipal. Even though parks are typically open to the public, they can be fenced off or temporarily closed, like at night time."
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2018-08-24 14:18:28+00:00): As i said, you changed grass to park. which is inaccurate. What you should have done is leave grass and then add another tag. not change more detailed info and adding less like you did https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dgrass
And again that isnt a park, its a garden. Show me evidence that its a park.
manihck (2018-08-24 14:34:08+00:00): Dear Nuno, there isn't any kind of grass in the area you reverted the changes I've added. As I said, it more than resembles a park. I've also read the landuse=garden and although it could be remotely related to it, it is still more relatable to a park.
Regarding evidence, it is pretty much in plain sight.
I'll add the quote from the Madeira tourism site, and you can compare it to the OSM description of Park: "No seio da baía da cidade, a Praça do Povo presenteia os transeuntes com majestosas vistas sobre o Atlântico e com o vislumbre do inesquecível sopé da cidade do Funchal. A circundar esta bainha de terra, são encontrados zonas de lazer, espaços lúdico-desportivos, bancos de descanso dos pedantes, tapetes verdejantes de plantas e flores que ladeiam todo o percurso pedonal."
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2018-08-24 14:38:05+00:00): i dont see a single word describing that as a park. you are mixing the concepts of landuse with public parks (thats what the park tag is for).
Example of parks in Funchal http://www.visitfunchal.pt/pt/cultura-e-patrim%C3%B3nio/parques-e-jardins.html
Do you see the ones you added? i dont
milet (2018-08-27 16:26:40+00:00): Hallo,
deine Änderungen haben leider den ganzen Gebäudekomplex beschädigt, so dass von der Schule aktuell nicht mehr viel dargestellt wird. Ich habe daher erstmal wieder alle Änderungen rückgängig gemacht.
milet (2018-08-27 16:27:20+00:00): Revert: https://openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/62045273
mueschel (2018-09-03 11:14:08+00:00): Hi,
you added two tags here:
  capacity = 40
  chargepoints = 2
What is 'capacity'? Can 40 cars charge in parallel? 
Could you check the wiki and see if you can add a 'socket' tag as well?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcharging_station

Jan
karson_ (2020-06-17 00:31:03+00:00): Do you still need these proposed crime watch zones? They aren't even tagged with anything.
perlywerly (2018-09-05 20:35:36+00:00): Hi captain_slow, 

You added an unnecessary link from Te Atatu Road to Ta Atatu road. Can you please remove this link and adjust the turn restrictions instead? 
The only_right_turn turn restriction from the link (398003009) should be removed. An only_right_turn turn restriction should be added to the ramp instead (from: 54657534, via:398003009, to:54657577). 
Thank You
captain_slow (2018-09-05 20:51:43+00:00): I have changed the turn restriction and removed the link: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/62324321
I have added the additional link in the first place because it would look much more intuitive on a GPS device if one heading south on Te Atatu Road and turning right on the motorway. But you are right, it was really unnecessary. Thanks for the hint.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2018-08-24 14:21:28+00:00): Again this is not a park. i will ahve to report you as a pokemon Go user. Adding fake parks is not allowed in OpenStreetMap
manihck (2018-08-24 14:08:42+00:00): Regarding the changes I've made to this area, may I ask why you revert them?
I fixed the area around Palácio de São Lourenço with accurate data and you reverted the changes so it is now an empty area. What was wrong with the data I've added?
It wasn't finished yet, I was about to add the walking paths.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2018-08-24 14:13:36+00:00): you changed a churchyard to park, which doesn't apply.
you misaligned the geometries, therefore i shared the link on your changeset to read about misaligned satellite imagery.
For example the crosswalk on Avenida do Mar in front of Pizza Hut, which was correct and you set it in a incorrect location
manihck (2018-08-24 14:37:38+00:00): Thank you for the info in the offset, I'll be reading it later when I get home and try to understand how to map it correctly.
Also, I needed to change the polygon to reach a point that I couldn't click and forgot about align it again.
You could have pointed it out and I would have corrected it.
t_ja (2018-09-03 17:13:17+00:00): Ahoj,
prečo si zmenil tagovanie z living_street na residential na https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/454040949 ? Ak si tam bol osobne, nemohol si tú modrú tabuľu prehliadnuť, a ak si tam nebol, aký si mal dôvod to meniť, keď nepoznáš realitu?
erickdeoliveiraleal (2018-09-04 14:15:13+00:00): Não conecte áreas com vias como fez aqui: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5853798544
Commodoortje (2018-08-26 07:42:32+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
Commodoortje (2018-08-26 07:46:54+00:00): Ik heb inmiddels een kleine aanpassing verricht. Het adres op de landuse is niet nodig, alle adressen die in de polygon vallen worden gezien. Een verbouwing op 42A meegenomen. Naam op nr 42 op gebouw gezet.
Hier kun je de wijzigingen zien:
http://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=62000585
viloan (2018-08-24 14:14:13+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
Christopher (2018-09-07 19:39:57+00:00): Hallo Peter,
wenn du sehr viele verbundene Wege an einer Stelle hinzufügst, musst du nicht für jeden weg einen einzelnen Änderungssatz erstellen. Es ist für die Nachvollziehbarkeit deiner Änderungen hilfreich diese zusammen zu fassen. 
Meine eigentliche Frage ist, da ich dort vor einiger Zeit unterwegs war, ist das öffentliches Gelände oder privates? Ich bin der Meinung zumindest im Norden sind Tore und der Zutritt somit beschränkt.
Grüße,
Christopher
peter5678 (2018-10-08 16:16:18+00:00): Das Gelände ist privat.
Christopher (2018-10-25 20:23:36+00:00): Wenn das privat ist sollten die wege auch so gekennzeichnet werden (access=private oder access=no o.Ä.) wenn sie denn überhaupt zu erfassen sind. So würde mich jedes Routing über das Gelände führen. Bitte anpassen.
Christopher
OF0 (2018-08-24 18:15:21+00:00): Du solltest Deinen Changeset revertieren. Siehe https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/61957038
surveyor54 (2018-08-24 20:51:59+00:00): HI,
ich gehöre zu Fraktion der Nichtverkleber und Teile die Meinung der Forumsdikussion.

https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=624985#p624985

Außerdem sollte man auch den zweiten Teil von deinem beachten:

That being said, when the way is a highway, it usually is most accurate to include a gap, so that the area ends by the side of the road and does not share nodes with the road's way. This is because highway ways usually are traced along the centerline of the road, and it is unlikely that the area being tagged actually extends to the center of the road. 

Einen höflichen Gruß
surveyor54
OF0 (2018-08-25 06:41:51+00:00): https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=624985#p624985 ??? Du meinst sicherlich:
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=31807&p=1
Auch in diesem Thread konnte kein Konsen erlangt werden. Weshalb führst Du ihn dann hier an? Wenn Du auf bestimmte Posts in diesem Thread Bezug nehmen willst, nenn' bitte hier deren Nummer.

[...]Außerdem sollte man auch den zweiten Teil von deinem beachten:

That being said, when the way is a highway, it usually is most accurate to include a gap, so that the area ends by the side of the road and does not share nodes with the road's way. This is because highway ways usually are traced along the centerline of the road, and it is unlikely that the area being tagged actually extends to the center of the road. [...]

Dies outed den Verfasser nur als Anhänger Deiner Meinung. Dass die Fläche des Landuses genauer in die Datenbank eingetragen wird, ist unbestritten. Er verschweigt aber, dass jetzt nicht mehr ermittelt werden kann, ob sich zwischen Straße und Landuse noch ein Objekt befindet. Es gehen somit wichtige Informationen verloren. Auch blendet er vollständig aus, dass Wege zwar mit einet Linie in OSM eingezeichnet wird, diese Linie stellt jedoch ein zweidimensionales Objekt dar, dessen Breite durch das width-Tag angegeben werden sollte. Hilfsweise kann mit Standadardwerten für den jeweiligen Straßentyp gerechnet werden um die Fläche der Straße zu ermitteln und dadurch die Fläche des Landuses zi verkleinern. Es ist die Aufgabe des Renderers dies entsprechend auf die Tiles zu bringen und nicht die das Mappers. Genau so verhält es sich beim Berechnen von Flächen. Das Herausrechnen der Straßenfläche ist die Aufgabe der Algoritmen und nicht des Mappers.

Gruß  zurück
surveyor54 (2018-08-25 06:49:53+00:00): Lieber OF0,

ich kenne deine Diskussionen über dieses Thema und deshalb deine Einstellung, die ich respektiere.

In unserer Gegend wird von den lokalen usern nicht geklebt, ich bitte dies auch zu respektieren.

Viele Grüße
surveyor54
OF0 (2018-08-25 08:02:17+00:00): Aber selbstverständich respektiere ich andere Meinungen. Ich habe Deinen Changeset doch gar nicht revertiert.
Ich möchte Dich bitten zukünftig, insbesondere gegenüber neuen Beitragenden, nicht zu unterschlagen, dass es auch Berechtigte andere Meinungen gibt. Sonst setzt sich noch durch derartig angewandte schleichende Manipulation die falsche Methode durch. Sanjezz wird durchaus selbst in der Lage sein zu beurteilen, welche der gängigen Methoden die geeignetste ist. Solche Bevormundungen erregen doch immer den Anschein, als sei die von Dir bevorzugte Methode die einzig mögliche.

 Grüße zurück
Almtesh (2018-08-26 14:40:35+00:00): « L'adresse Bordeaux Adress » ? Tu es sûr que le nom est le bon ?
votre_solution_de_visibilite_digitale_locale (2018-08-27 07:22:18+00:00): Bonjour,j'avais le nom de la raison sociale
merci encore du signalement
JJIglesias (2018-08-24 14:59:37+00:00): Por favor las construcciones hay que ortogonalizarlas, la vista del satelite NO es Cenital (Vertical) sino Angular (Lateral), las construcciones NO estan deformadas usualmente son cuadrados y rectangulos, en ID puedes usar el ""Shift+S"" para que el programa lo haga (Tocas click derecho en tu mouse y te sale un cuadrado, si lo tocas el sistema ""cuadra"" la figura, mas proporcional a la realidad) 
Gracias
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-18 18:11:16+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5853850088/history has fixme = yes that was added in this edit
What requires fixing here? fixme=yes is not particularly clear, and maybe problem got fixed since then?
jmapb (2019-03-12 22:05:14+00:00): Hi, what's up with this way:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/359214394
(Noticed it on keepright)
thanks, jmb
TheBestIdea (2019-03-12 22:13:17+00:00): Hey. Thanks for pointing that out. That had been a driveway which I meant to delete because it doesn't exist anymore (if it ever did) but by mistake I just deleted all the tags and left the way. Fixed it now.
jmapb (2019-03-12 22:16:19+00:00): Dang you're fast!
CloCkWeRX (2019-09-24 06:34:13+00:00): A fair few of these are now visible in maxar imagery with further completion.
viloan (2018-08-24 16:00:05+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
David Crochet (2018-08-24 16:25:42+00:00): Attention au château d'eau dont l'emprise au sol est un élément carré point de vue cadastre, mais dont seulement le réservoir est cylindrique. Il faudrait indiqué que le réservoir ainsi dessiné se trouve à x mètre de hauteur puisque là on le situe au niveau du sol.
Map-Peter (2018-08-25 14:05:46+00:00): Hallo Marcus, 
kannst du mir sagen ob dies ein Wohngebäude ist? 
Gruß Peter
BER319 (2020-09-02 11:55:47+00:00): Hallo streckenkundler,

auf Grund des CS 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/88369354

bin ich auf diese protected_area gestoßen. Müsste das nicht protect_class = 25 sein, damit es besser als ehemaliges Militärgebiet gekennzeichnet ist. Als NSG habe ich es in keiner Übersicht gefunden? Soll das Betretungsverbot noch mit an die Relation verankert werden? So wie es Pfad-Finder beschrieben hat gilt ja dort ein Betretungsverbot. 

Viele Grüße
BER319
streckenkundler (2020-09-02 16:05:52+00:00): Welches Gebiet meinst du denn?  In dem CS ist Heidehof-Golmberg und Lieberoser Heide drin. Beides sind ausgewiesene NSGs mit Totalreservaten... Verordnung müsste ich Abend raussuchen. Bin Mobil unterwegs.  Sven
BER319 (2020-09-02 17:29:01+00:00): Hallo Sven,

Sorry ich meine 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5927513

das Gebiet müsste aber nach den Angaben von Pfad-Finder ein Militärisches Sperrgebiet sein. Leider ist diese Gegend nicht mein Erkundungsgebiet und ich habe kein Ortswissen. Ich habe es nur bei meinen Wanderungen entdeckt und mich dort über den access=privat gewundert. Die Angaben von Pfad-Finder findest du hier.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/88369354

VG
BER319
streckenkundler (2020-09-02 19:02:29+00:00): Ich mache mal im CS https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/88369354 weiter...

Sven
ovruni (2023-09-13 22:45:33+00:00): Aqui se ha cambiado a parque la cancha dentro del estadio
DannyMcD (2018-08-24 16:46:52+00:00): The changeset comment should be "POIs on Colonnade Road"
Leo Slager (2018-08-24 17:46:27+00:00): Gebouwen worden geïmporteerd vanuit het Kadaster. Daar kun je dus beter vanaf blijven. Als er iets niet klopt kun je dat melden bij het Kadaster.https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl/lvbag/bag-viewer/index.html#?geometry.x=173755.2625&geometry.y=442068.32652679&zoomlevel=7&objectId=0289100000001724&detailsObjectId=0289010000003727
Anders staat bij de volgende import de eerste versie weer op de kaart.
viloan (2018-08-24 17:12:27+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
Leo Slager (2018-08-24 17:36:53+00:00): Probeer concreet te omschrijven wat je toevoegt/verandert. Bijv: fietspad gewijzigd highway=pedestrian toegevoegd.
Leo Slager (2018-08-24 17:38:14+00:00): Nooit beginnen met access=no. Dat is alleen voor het bekende bord wit met rode rand.
Leo Slager (2018-08-24 17:39:51+00:00): bicycle=no en foot =yes zijn natuurlijk default voor een highway=pedestrian. 
Die behoeven dus niet toegevoegd te worden.
Luzandro (2020-04-04 09:55:44+00:00): Hallo Volker,

ich bin dafür diese Abbiegebeschränkung zu löschen: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8591923/history#map=19/48.12732/16.31438

Die Nowakgasse ist eine Einbahn. In die Gegenrichtung darf man nur mit dem Rad fahren und kurz vor der Kreuzung wird der Radstreifen in 2 Teil nach links und rechts aufgeteilt. Nur für den - nicht in OSM vorhandenen - Radstreifen nach rechts gilt auch die Abbiegebeschränkung und ich halte es auch nicht für wahnsinnig sinnvoll, diesen dafür extra einzutragen.

LG Andreas
Volker Fröhlich (2020-04-04 10:15:27+00:00): Ja, nur zu! Vielleicht war das damals auch noch anders oder ich hab schlampig geschaut.