piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eggie (2021-09-14 20:07:43+00:00): Alle info heb ik even naar de adresnode gekopieerd
Wesley Hendriks (2021-09-14 20:22:59+00:00): Dankjewel voor de tip Eggie, zal vanaf nu hier beter op letten!
wolfbert (2026-05-15 14:18:08+00:00): Hallo, ad Paintball Park: die angegebene Adresse ist Freizeitzentrum 1, das ist aber gegenüber in der Speedworld. Dort dürfte sich auch der Hauptstandort befinden, die Fläche mit der Adresse ist nur ein Spielfeld.
wolfbert (2026-05-18 06:14:58+00:00): Ich habe die Daten jetzt einmal verschoben, ist noch nicht perfekt, aber besser.
XimeX (2026-05-18 07:20:53+00:00): danke
ElliottPlack (2021-09-17 15:48:25+00:00): Wahoo! Thank you for adding this!! I look forward to riding it one day. Saw it in the news. Have you been across?
ElliottPlack (2021-09-17 16:25:32+00:00): Since you're not on OSM US slack yet (we're discussing here on #local-newyorkstate) https://osmus.slack.com/archives/CJ4QKU40H/p1631849526014300
ElliottPlack (2021-09-17 16:26:02+00:00): I made some minor tagging tweaks here https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/931223087#map=17/40.70624/-73.99693
ElliottPlack (2021-09-17 16:26:50+00:00): Assuming it is not a shared use path, then the foot=no should be added to the bike path. Routing engines in the USA assume a cycleway allows foot traffic https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access_restrictions#United_States_of_America
Regef85 (2022-02-01 22:07:44+00:00): Please only upload straightened buildings.
DUGA (2023-01-27 15:30:42+00:00): That's not the correct way to map speed bump.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/983377356#map=19/41.64299/-75.47249
pudov_maxim (2021-09-15 16:11:11+00:00): Привет. А почему понижается статус дорог? Например та же ул. Ф. Энгельса никак не residential - по ней идет куча городского трафика.
nick71250 (2021-10-05 06:03:10+00:00): Добрый день!
К примеру улица Тельмана. Сейчас у нее статус Highway: Primary. Если посмотреть в OSM Wiki, то можно увидеть, что такой статус дается дорогам, соединяющим большие города. Какие большие города соединяет улица Тельмана в г.Энгельсе??? Вот к примеру кусок трассы Р-229, проходящий через город Энгельс будет иметь такой статус, а другие внутригородские дороги - нет. Как-то так...

С уважением,
pudov_maxim (2021-10-05 21:31:12+00:00): Да, всё верно, На OSM Wiki есть голосование по классификации статусов дорог. Но в нем есть разделение на дороги ВНЕ населенных пунктов(как раз то о чем Вы пишите относится именно к ним) и статусы дорог внутри НП, то что было размечено в Энгельсе и в других городах.

Эти правки откатывал я, чтобы вернуть статусы дорог. Если же хочется поправить статусы определенных улиц в городе, готов поучаствовать в обсуждениях :)

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D1%8F/%D0%9A%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D1%84%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D0%B4%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B3_(%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5)#.D0.9A.D0.BB.D0.B0.D1.81.D1.81.D0.B8.D1.84.D0.B8.D0.BA.D0.B0.D1.86.D0.B8.D1.8F_.D0.B4.D0.BE.D1.80.D0.BE.D0.B3_.D0.B2.D0.BD.D1.83.D1.82.D1.80.D0.B8_.D0.BD.D0.B0.D1.81.D0.B5.D0.BB.D0.B5.D0.BD.D0.BD.D1.8B.D1.85_.D0.BF.D1.83.D0.BD.D0.BA.D1.82.D0.BE.D0.B2
nick71250 (2021-10-06 05:06:19+00:00): Добрый день! Ну если народ голосовал... то так тому и быть.
Negreheb (2021-09-15 07:40:47+00:00): Servus, 
ich schau mir gerade ein paar Sachen mal durch, sonst nichts. 

Hier ist halt die Frage, was du hier eigentlich gemacht hast... https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/67832017 der Weg ist noch da und den Weg https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/67832040 hast du zwar mal angefasst aber nicht einfach gelöscht. Laut https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=111214070 hast du da nur von dem lustigen Dreieck eine Node im Süden gelöscht, dass es wirklich ein Dreieck ist und keine Pfeilspitze, oder so.

Das Ziel von deinen Bearbeitungen ist, so sieht es für mich aktuell aus, die Meldungen von deinem Analysetool zu beseitigen und weniger konkret die Daten zu verbessern, ist das so korrekt? 

Vielleicht magst du in den Chat kommen, entweder IRC oder mit Matrix (bzw. dem Client Element), in beidem den Channel #osm-de (in Matrix dann #osm-de:matrix.org), vielleicht lassen sich dann ja ein paar Unklarheiten beseitigen :)
VulkanMaps (2021-09-15 14:10:32+00:00): Hallo Negreheb,

ich gehe ganz überwiegend die Geometrien durch, die von meinem Tool als "problematisch" ausgeworfen werden.

An dem Beispiel hier sieht man, dass ich wohl besser das Dreieck und das Tiny Viereck gelöscht hätte. So gesehen habe ich die Daten hier kaum verbessert.

Ich habe aber auch schon viele Selfintersections behoben, und damit Geometrien in der Karte überhaupt erst sichtbar gemacht, weil auch OSM diese nicht rendert.

Nimm doch gerne Kontakt im LinkedIn auf.

Mit besten Grüßen, Maik Busch
4004 (2021-09-16 15:41:36+00:00): hi, any reason why you removed the give_way direction tag?
Red_Ranger (2021-09-16 19:26:49+00:00): Greetings,

I have restored the direction = backward tag.

Best,
Red Ranger
goodidea (2022-02-11 22:25:20+00:00): Small note: you could have changed cycleway=track to cycleway=separate (according to sidewalk=separate which is also set there) ... (See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycleway%3Dseparate).

The Osmose warning could also mention this, I think. I set this tag now for the ways there. And I also just discovered this tag in November of last year... Best regards!
emvee (2022-02-13 15:21:10+00:00): My take is that cycleway=seperate for this case is useless tagging as that is what bicycle=use_sidepath is already saying. Only when the path is not obligated it can make sense to me, but I still not see the real need, better look at the map to see there is a separate sidepath.

Also note that although the wiki says de facto, the actual use is quite low
goodidea (2022-02-25 14:10:23+00:00): It always makes sense as an explicit information I would say ... althought it is perhaps not strictly necessary (like many other things) ... For me, it's a completion to make things 100% clear ... perhaps it can be helpful for data consumers, you never know ... Or for human users (mappers) to not set cycleway=track again ...

A low use it not an argument for me ... it makes much sense because it corresponds very well to sidewalk=separate, which is widely used. So what is the argument, that sidewalk=separate makes sense (you can also set foot=use_sidepath!), but cycleway=separate not?

For my feeling, it fits very well in the systematics for road tags in general ...
emvee (2022-02-25 20:48:35+00:00): What about my argument "that cycleway=seperate for this case is useless tagging as that is what bicycle=use_sidepath is already saying"?

sidewalk=separate makes sense as long as there is no foot=use_sidepath.

If there is any tagging missing about the surroundings it is to my opinion how nice/green the environment is, but that is not something that can be objectively measured.
goodidea (2022-02-25 22:13:02+00:00): I have a different opinion or taste here ... I have explained enough I think ... I will also tag sidewalk=separate together with foot=use_sidepath, because these are 2 different things. One is describing the sidewalk infrastructure, the other is an access tag for pedestrians ... 

I think that not always the goal is "as few tags as possible".

And I deliberately wrote "you COULD have changed..." and not "you SHOULD have changed...". That was meant literally.
emvee (2022-02-26 08:14:39+00:00): Yes, there is a difference between access and infrastructure tags.

To my opinion sidewalk=separate is not a infrastructure tag, it does not tell anything about the way itself.

A goal I see is to have a less overlapping data as a possible, that overlapping data makes maintenance harder.

NB: No need to agree, let's just exchange idea's.
4004 (2021-09-16 15:44:01+00:00): Hi, please note that the destination sign only applies to motor vehicles
4004 (2021-09-16 15:46:43+00:00): would  been good if you could do an overpass sweep and retag so it only applies to motor vehicles
Red_Ranger (2021-09-16 19:26:24+00:00): Greetings,

I will review my edits and please feel free to remove my edits if they’re incorrect.

Best,
Red Ranger
4004 (2021-09-17 12:30:05+00:00): thanks! I've edited tagging on the roads near this changeset (most were incorrectly tagged before you)
bxl-forever (2021-09-18 11:31:15+00:00): Hello, @elucci.

I suggest to always include the following tags for private gardens
* access=private
* garden:type=residential

This is because the garden you’ve just created here is now showing up in apps as an ordinary place where people would be encouraged to go for a walk.

Have a nice day.
bxl-forever (2021-09-18 11:33:54+00:00): I see you are using the iD editor.

It even lets you do it easily:
"Garden Type" → residential
"Allowed Access" → private

Hope this helps.
elucci (2021-09-19 19:54:50+00:00): Hi @bxl-forever,
Thanks for the remark. I was showing a friend the very basic features of OSM by detailing a residential garden in its neighbourhood, inviting him to do the rest and I therefore forgot to check these details. Thanks for pointing them out, I'll fix it right away!
BikePC (2021-09-20 14:52:06+00:00): Vandaag 2021-09-20 ter plaatse geweest. Uw aanpassing highway=cycleway veroorzaakt dat het fietspad weer normaal routeert - dit klopt niet - reconstructie nog volop gaande - en ik heb dus de weg weer terug gezet op 'construction'. Het lager liggende (nu) voetpad is ook under 'construction' en wordt volgens een ter plaatse aanwezige medewerker van het Hoogheemraadschap een ruiterpad. Even aanzien hoe het wordt.
ovruni (2021-09-14 21:42:36+00:00): Hola, en este conjunto de cambios se han agregado vías como edificios, sin embargo algunas de las partes parecen no ser edificios completos, sino contener algunos dentro, por lo que en algunos casos he cambiado a barrier y en otros a landuse. La etiqueta building se encuentra destinada a los edificios, dentro de un lote podría haber un edificios o mas de uno.
Saludos
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-09-16 01:48:35+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 111266298 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some road classification changes in the UK.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/110881337 et al.
tonyf1 (2021-09-21 08:06:43+00:00): Hi. what is your reason for tagging the vehicular entry into Wilson Botanic Park Way: 779286923 bicycle=no ?
tonyf1 (2021-10-16 05:10:32+00:00): reverted  Changeset #112565659
◪ Jarv (2021-09-16 00:44:51+00:00): Hi Barry.
The A272 between the A3 and A22 is a primary route. It does lack the green and yellow signage which is typically found on a primary route. However it is still classified as a primary route so is "trunk". Please see http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/daveemtb/diary/7808 which is a note on many of the ways you changed.
It is due to be reviewed by WSCC to reclassify the A272 West of the A24 to a non-primary A road (likely due to me pestering them about it for the past few years) but this has not yet happened. https://yourvoice.westsussex.gov.uk/9868/widgets/28223/documents/13943 (section 7.140)

I'll revert the changesets which you changed the A272's classification
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111214944
stragu (2021-09-18 13:51:54+00:00): Hi there
Could you please provide more descriptive changeset comments? It looks like you only use “updates”, which is as generic and non-descriptive as it gets. It makes it very difficult for other editors to understand what you are working on and review your changes.
tonyf1 (2021-10-16 05:03:09+00:00): Reverted Changeset #112565550, all tags reverted. Changed geometry reverted, without a changeset comment it is difficult to know if intentional
ElliottPlack (2021-09-14 21:32:15+00:00): Wrong changeset name! Should have been: deleted unused way
CjMalone (2021-09-15 14:34:20+00:00): Hey, just a heads up, since this isn't free it should have been fee=yes. I've fixed it in #111248505. Thank you and welcome
ArtWaw (2021-09-15 14:43:37+00:00): Thanks for that. I need to make screen font bigger apparently since I read that "free" not "fee". Will pay more attention for the future.
Cheers!
CjMalone (2021-09-15 15:57:06+00:00): Ha, I've been having issues reading my laptop lately. Perhaps time for an opticians appointment :(

Anyway, hope you enjoy OSM, let me know if you have any questions.
aweech (2021-09-15 15:49:31+00:00): Hi,
I undid this change because this stretch of roadway is still used quite often. I tagged it with ownership=private to mark that it is not a public highway. When deleting former roadways, please only do so to roadways that are no longer used and not the only way to access properties.
TheShiningAlbatross (2021-09-14 22:12:15+00:00): Correction: Aligned service roads near Отважный переулок. #adt
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111216507
Jmapper007 (2021-09-14 22:40:46+00:00): Ayyyyyy 50th changeset!
Frans S (2021-09-15 07:44:41+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping on this task
Please map buildings individually. You clustered a number of buildings which are clearly separated.
See this webpage
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=111229410
Best regards
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111217075
gscholz (2021-10-14 04:50:28+00:00): Hi GersonCalei,
this changeset has destroyed the boundary relation of "Barrio Lourdes":

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=-89.17767&lat=13.69801&zoom=17

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=111217124

Can you please fix this?
Kind Regards
Guido Scholz
eggie (2021-09-15 06:59:11+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

Feedback.. De juiste tag is club=scout en niet scouting
Gebruik in principe alleen de adresnodes. Dus niet de gebouwomtrek 
De regel construction=yes kun je nog verwijderen.
Om de naam te laten renderen wordt nogal eens amenity=community_centre bijgetagd. club=scout zie je niet op de kaart. Alleen name=...  komt ook niet op de kaart.

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2021-09-15 07:14:44+00:00): Tagging heb ik aangepast en de construction=.....  verwijderd van gebouwen en weg. 
Het zal straks wel gaan  renderen.
gr eggie
eggie (2021-09-15 07:01:51+00:00): Dag chincilla..
Wellicht kun je beter landuse=recreation_ground gebruiken ipv leisure=park

MVG
eggie
eggie (2021-09-15 07:05:25+00:00): Hi chincilla
loc_name  means the name in use by the local people.
If the name is equal you may delete this line. 
Did you ask the former mapper?

Greetz, eggie
Johnwhelan (2021-12-15 22:30:50+00:00): name=Rusambi perhaps?

currently n=Rusambi
❤️‍🔥 (2021-09-14 23:40:46+00:00): also reverted, see https://osm.org/changeset/111217494
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111217442
mariotomo (2021-09-15 15:54:20+00:00): Hola, bienvenidå a OSM, gracias por mejorar nuestro mapa libre y colectivo.
Yo como otros revisamos las contribuciones que entran en la base de datos, y nos ayuda un título más explicito, que explique el contenido de los cambios, por lo general se sugiere la estructura mínima "verbo de acción + objeto; detalles si acaso".  en este caso, mejor que "añadiendo" sería "añadí una iglesia bautista".

un consejo: a veces ayuda comparar capa con capa, Bing, Maxar y si hay otra.  otro consejo es empezar mapeando los lugares donde uno vive.

aquí Bing+Maxar me sugieren que estamos mirando a dos, quizás tres edificios pegados, pero distintos.  me puedes confirmar?
mariotomo (2021-09-15 16:02:36+00:00): revisa si quieres, y mejora si lo entendí mal, gracias! https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/111252538
❤️‍🔥 (2021-09-14 23:40:19+00:00): This is incorrect and has been reverted. Both islands have dual names (see https://gazetteer.linz.govt.nz/place/54454 and https://gazetteer.linz.govt.nz/place/54452)
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111217494
user_9850906 (2021-09-14 23:50:42+00:00): Sorry, but you are incorrect.  The LINZ entries (that you pointed to) clearly states that each island has two official names - not one dual name.  (Unlike, for example, "Stewart Island/Rakiura", which *is* a dual name.)  (Also, it's rude to describe a good faith edit as 'vandalism'.)
❤️‍🔥 (2021-09-15 00:13:31+00:00): If there are two official names, both of which are commonly used, then the name= tag in OSM should contain the name in the local language(s). In New Zealand, places with two names are most commonly written with a / between them, or with one of the names in parentheses. 

If you consume OSM data and only want English names, then you can use name:en=* and fallback to name=* if there is no name:en=* tag.
SomeoneElse (2021-10-08 23:18:00+00:00): Hello,
Andy from OSM's Data Working Group here.
There are lots of places around the world that have different names in different official languages, and different ways of dealing with them.  Some OSM communities have the "most used name" in the name tag, with others as e.g. alt_name; some have all possible names separated by "/" in the name.  Just taking Belgium as an example, the country https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/52411 has 3 names separated with "/", Liege / Luik is done another way https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1681788 (name:fr is used as name), Leuven / Louvain another https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1448497912 (name:nl is used) and Brussels still another https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1635651356 (both names, with a hyphen).
Generally speaking its up to the local community to decide what's in the "name" tag, and often (as seems to be the case here) translating official guidance into OSM tags isn't straightforward.  I'd suggest that a discussion involving the wider OSM NZ community is the way forward.  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nz doesn't seem hugely busy, but https://openstreetmap.community/ suggests a couple of "Oceania" options too which may be worth looking at.
For completeness, http://osm.mapki.com/history/relation.php?id=6571744 shows the history of the tags on the object.  
Best Regards,
Andy
mariotomo (2021-09-15 16:04:10+00:00): si tienes acceso al nombre de las calles, o si puedes confirmar que no tienen nombre propio?
Mordechai23 (2021-09-15 08:24:23+00:00): a te windy to w kosmos jadą? Przecież z drugiej strony wysiada się z nich na perony, więc ścieżki istnieją, tylko jeszcze nie czynne
maro21 (2021-10-06 17:24:59+00:00): Windy tylko orientacyjnie narysowałem i możliwe że niedokładnie. Nie ma jeszcze podkładu, żeby superprecyzyjnie narysować. Na pewno ścieżka nie przechodzi przez skarpę trzy metry w dół. Z windy się tak naprawdę wychodzi od razu na peron. Tak więc nie będzie ścieżki łączącej windę z peronem, tylko to winda będzie do poprawienia.
DressyPear4 (2021-09-15 10:45:10+00:00): Olá, não faça testes no mapa e não envie dados com avisos, corrija antes.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111217638
mariotomo (2021-09-15 16:14:03+00:00): si tienes acceso a esta escuela, podrías revisar si hay más techos que cubren otras canchas?
Glassman (2021-09-15 19:55:52+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111217973
Glassman (2021-09-15 19:57:05+00:00): If you haven't already check out https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines be sure to.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111217973
ovruni (2021-09-15 23:22:18+00:00): Hola, aquí nuevamente se han agregando edificios como parte de una relación que se tocan en uno de sus lados, por lo que los he cambiado a building:part y movido el building como una vía que engloba a los tres.
Saludos
ipple (2021-09-15 00:07:09+00:00): forgot to mention this includes sidewalks, foot paths, and grass.
hauke-stieler (2021-10-09 22:42:44+00:00): Hi,

der tag bunker_type=hosptal existiert weder mit noch ohne Tippfehler. Habe ihn mal auf bunker_type=medical geändert, da das ein offizieller tag für solche Bunker ist (siehe [0]).
Generell immer ans Wiki halten was das mapping angeht und nicht irgendwo anders abgucken oder sich tags ausdenken. Kann man machen, aber dann kann die Daten halt niemand auswerten weil es keinen Standard gibt. Und generell vor dem hochladen schauen, dass alle Daten korrekt und frei von Flüchtigkeitsfehlern sind ;)

Grüße
Hauke

[0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bunker_type
Glassman (2021-09-15 19:55:16+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111218585
MappingMaiden (2022-05-16 19:38:56+00:00): Hi Gabriela Silvano da Cunha, thanks for mapping! I noticed you and other mappers using hashtags #opensidewalks #opensidewalks-lapa #AI4Accessibility have added “barrier=kerb” tags in this area. Some of those barriers intersect vehicle navigable roads in several places such as: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9092822341 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9092822342. This means they will block any car or truck routing at those locations. 

I think you are trying to map places where there are curbs for sidewalks or crosswalks and I noticed OSM policy for “barrier=kerb” (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dkerb) says “Combining with highway=crossing is usually a mistake; include kerb=* on the crossing node, but *not* barrier=kerb as there will usually not be a kerb across the major highway, though there could be a traffic_calming=table”. 

So I am wondering if the “barrier=kerb” nodes that intersect with vehicle navigable highways such as (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9092822342) could be updated to one of the values at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:kerb? If so we can change them to kerb=yes and then you can add the appropriate type. 

Thanks, and let me know if you have any questions!
Eifelkobold! (2022-04-09 00:23:19+00:00): Hallo WoodB,

mir ist aufgefallen, dass du in diesem Änderungssatz die lokalen, kölschen Namen von mehreren Objekten entfernt hast. Was ist der Grund dafür?

viele Grüße

Eifelkobold
Eifelkobold! (2022-04-24 20:03:29+00:00): Ich habe diesen Änderungssatz in Änderungssatz 120137492 (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120137492) vollständig zurückgesetzt.
nevw (2021-09-15 03:03:37+00:00): Hi Paul
I noticed you deleted the tag leisure=slipway from the Saratoga Boat Ramp. Was this accidental?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dslipway
WoodWoseWulf (2021-09-15 20:56:36+00:00): Hi Paul,

Please don't miss nevw's question here, but you also added a building named "Studio". What kind of studio is it? Is it the location of a business or is it private?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/983429727
Paul Anderson 68 (2021-09-15 21:39:21+00:00): The studio is a private art studio. 

I thought I was adding boat ramp to the name as it is known as the Saratoga boat ramp not slipway.
WoodWoseWulf (2021-09-15 23:33:48+00:00): Studio:

Is the studio something you can hire or that certain select people from the public are allowed to use? If it's not, and is instead something that the current residents of the property are using, it might possibly fall outside of the scope of what we should map on OSM:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Limitations_on_mapping_private_information

"Do not map the personal behaviour, preferences and habits of individuals"

"Do not map personal private indoor facilities"

Boat Ramp:

leisure=slipway is the correct tag to designate a boat ramp. The name tag/key should only be used for actual names, and other tag combinations can be used to describe features. I will read the slipway tagging in addition to the name you've added.