piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
zluuzki (2023-04-22 06:15:46+00:00): Without going too much into detail, such a big deletion has a variety of benefits compared to deleting the ways directly before retracing. Learned this while mapping transmission in FL,GA,SC,NC&AL.
(If wished, I can also go into more detail)

I will not revert the entire edit here, but I searched using the Osmose QA tool for all unconnected poles/towers and restored the ways with more than 10 or so in a row.
https://www.osm.org/changeset/135216271
The rest is going to be properly retraced, just like I did already in the states mentioned above.

Further, I don't see why this is "flat out unacceptable". My point is: Those trashy ways (an actual shame for OSM) were all over the state for 15 years, if they are gone but a handful of power towers will be orphaned for a few months, then that's not the end of the world. 
But that's just my view.

Greetings
clay_c (2023-04-22 14:09:58+00:00): This is an insufficient response. You cannot unilaterally decide that your own edits are of high quality and that the elements you deleted were not. Furthermore, on OSM it is good practice to "keep the history" by improving the geometry of existing elements, rather than deleting them and tracing new ones.

Please do a full revert as requested.
MoiraPrime (2023-04-22 15:33:35+00:00): OpenStreetMap should be treated like a collaborative project, not as your own personal sandbox. It's not really your say to just delete all the valid but imprecise data in an area and assert "I'll replace it when I get to it." No. That's not ok.

Furthermore, you should be keeping the history. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history
zluuzki (2023-04-22 17:03:48+00:00): "You cannot unilaterally decide..."
- That's not my decision, that's a straight fact. That's how convinced I am of myself here! Narcissist? No, we're talking about data from the Tiger import, which was what I mainly deleted here. I think anyone who has ever worked with Tiger(power lines) will be convinced that their edits are better than TIGER.
If you're seriously questioning if my work on power lines is worse than orginal TIGER power lines, then that's extremely disrespectful. (I don't think you do, but it somewhat sounds like that)

Preserving history is important - but which history? None of the lines have more than two tags - power=line and voltage=*. Power=line is obvious on the aerial image, voltage is somewhat easily interpretable from other connecting lines. ("somewhat" because some people failed or just guessed some wrong values)
Nothing that I have deleted here was some kind of "special" information, no on the ground survey, no special data digged from the depth of government docs, generally nothing which isn't directly obvious, nothing which is worth preserving.

The claim that this data is/was "valid" is highly questionable. Straight power lines have countless weird slight offsets - sometimes even hundreds of meters. Better no data than being that imprecise, IMO.
(no data for a few months only)

I see that asking local people about it (e.g. on slack MS channel) would've been better and I apologize for not doing so. (and I won't do such deletions of low quality data anymore).
However, I don't see what should be the point of a revert now. I spend a lot of my time working on a solution which could have satisfied the interests of both sides - Not one sentence lost over this, and I'm once again supposed to be the idiot conflating this trashy TIGER data with the lines I already retraced (which are actually quite a lot) - so that I can delete them in two months again when retracing.
clay_c (2023-04-22 17:48:47+00:00): > If you're seriously questioning if my work on power lines is worse than orginal TIGER power lines, then that's extremely disrespectful.

Was it not disrespectful to do a mass deletion in the first place? It's obvious to anyone that that's against community guidelines. When you ignore community guidelines, you disrespect the whole community. We're all just reacting to being disrespected. I'm usually a very patient person, but I know when to set boundaries and I've stopped being nice with you long ago.

This is indicative of your reaction to criticism in general. You take all criticism personally, and you're not even willing to consider a situation in which your well-intentioned work may have done more harm than good. But what's alarming to me is your use of the phrase "both sides", despite not really addressing the concerns of the other "side". Is the entire OSM community the other side? Why are there sides?

You've been told before not to do massive changes without community input, but you did it again. It shouldn't be a huge surprise that people are upset. I'm tired of talking to a brick wall.
zluuzki (2023-04-22 18:58:49+00:00): "Was it not disrespectful to do a mass deletion in the first place?"
***A mass deletion of low quality data from an 15 year old import. Not a mass deletion of data into which someone put a lot of effort.
I don't see how that's disrespectful to anyone.
"It's obvious to anyone that that's against community guidelines." - Deleting low quality imported data in order to improve is againest community guidelines now, noted, will not happen again.
...funny that you're here telling me stories about "community guidelines" when you massively broke those exact guidelines 2 months ago, thats quite hypocritical (CS133425452&133388647+hundreds more for reference)

"you're not even willing to consider a situation in which your well-intentioned work may have done more harm than good."
Of course I have! But other than the unconnected poles/towers, which was the original problem, I don't see any other harm. And I fixed those, because the deletion of these specific ways actually caused harm. If I wouldn't have considered that this CS harmed something, I wouldn't have spend my time finding&restoring those ways. By "sides", I mean simply people seeing this changeset as positive and people seeing it as negative.

I'd never expect that even deleting poor tiger data (in order to efficiently improve it) at a bit larger scale offends some people that much - but certainly important to know, I guess
MoiraPrime (2023-04-22 19:09:49+00:00): The more you bicker here the more I question where your data is coming from. A lot of it is correct... but how are you getting this seemingly correct data of far away places? How did you know the substation along MS 588 is the Sand Hill substation? How did you know the long range power lines are operated by Cooperative Energy? If you're using a third party source on the internet to find this data, you need to provide that source and make sure it's compatible with the ODBL.
woodpeck (2023-04-22 20:11:20+00:00): zluuzki, your argument might have a leg to stand on if you had indeed only deleted "trashy" power lines that were untouched for 12 years, but as I mentioned above, you have deleted (and since restored) at least one that was last modified 8 days ago which casts doubts on your selection process. If you could make it a habit to discuss any such large projects with the community in advance - "i plan to overhaul power lines in the area of X, for this i want to delete all that match the criterion Y and then retrace using the source Z, any complaints?" - then mistakes such as this could be spotted before the damage is done and before you find yourself yet again in a situation where you backpedal while at the same time offending everyone who dared criticize your work...
zluuzki (2023-04-23 05:38:06+00:00): Power details come from a variety of sources. 
- Sand Hill Substation: Category "Educated Guess". Substations are always named after nearby places - preferably after the next populated place. Exceptions are when there multiple substations at one populated place. This is my experience from a lot of other substations where I have explicit data about the name available.
H o w e v e r, because Sand Hill is only an unincorporated community and not very far away from Ellisville, there might be a very low chance that it is actually named after something else & in hindsight I wouldn't have named it like that (even through I'm still relatively certain about it)
- Cooperative Energy Lines: An excellent reference is the EIA Form 860 data, government collected data about every US power plant. One entry is the operator of the interconnecting line (and their voltage). 
https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/eia860/
Just a few miles south of Sand Hill Substation is the Cooperative Energy's Moselle Power Plant  - the Grid Operator is listed as "South MS Electic Association", which is Coop. Energy (renamed themselfes a few years ago). Now using a combination of other power plant data which also feed cooperative energy lines, the Coop.Energy system area map https://cooperativeenergy.com/energy-resources/transmission-system-map/, rarely some parcel ownership data, annual reports (according to which they operate 1800 miles of transmission line), construction/expansion project related documents/websites and more. Each source must be viewed somewhat critical, but all in all, it draws a good picture. 
Still, I'm sometimes unsure and then I don't tag an operator (or add it later when I have more clarity).
And by the way, sometimes I'm closer than it seems ;)
---------------
Most power lines were not exactly untouched for 15 years, but most are still basically unimproved, even after being touched multiple times. But well, a few were actually improved good enouth & shouldn't have been deleted whatsoever, I understand.
I don't think I offended anyone, certainly not everyone. But ok, I'll get back to editing now. Mass edits will be avoided, turns out deleting the lines directly before retracing would've now been faster anyway...
user_6110846 (2023-04-19 07:11:19+00:00): видалено також двійника магазину
user_5359 (2023-04-19 11:58:18+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please move your business to the right building!
Taksine (2023-06-16 05:50:39+00:00): 你好 能不能别碰到桥就画个礼拜场所 它不是用在桥梁的
ivanbranco (2023-04-20 11:02:58+00:00): Hi vislupus, welcome to OSM

I noticed https://bgmtile.kade.si in your edits, what is it? Does it have a OSM compatible license?
vislupus (2023-04-21 12:42:40+00:00): Hi, 
It comes from https://map.bgmountains.org/#map=8/2810000/5250000/0
https://old.bgmountains.org/en/bgmountainsgpsmap/223-licence
It is amazing map for hiking in Bulgaria. However, I'm not sure if the license is OSM compatible.
vislupus (2023-04-22 08:41:32+00:00): I've searched and found that the license for the map is CC BY-NC-SA 2.5 BG (https://bgmountains.org/en/terms-of-use) and I think it should be ok to use it. Also in this forum https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/topic/76303 one of the authors said that they have plans to add the data to OSM.
ivanbranco (2023-04-22 08:45:33+00:00): Thanks for the reply and the info vislupus, I was curious because I never saw this imagery been used on OSM before

good mapping :)
Beton Krai (2023-09-05 13:36:55+00:00): Hello, tactile_paving=yes on ways should only be set where the tactile lines and bumps are built into the way.
For these crossings, tactile paving is present only on kerbs and should be mapped on the kerb or crossing nodes.
eggie (2023-04-19 08:14:50+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

Tip.. Gebruik PDOK acteel in Nederland als achtergrond.. BING is vaak verouderd..  Niet overal overigens. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
user_5359 (2023-04-19 11:52:25+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I remove your SEO SPAM (mostly foreign keys)
tbicr (2023-04-24 20:19:05+00:00): вітаю, калі ласка, калі зьмяняеце `name` то зьмяняйце таксама `name:be` і `name:ru`
literan (2023-04-19 19:15:07+00:00): кривая адреска, снова под откат
NorthCrab_upload (2023-04-19 08:00:21+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nieprawidłowa wartość addr:postcode. Kod pocztowy powinien być formatu XX-XXX, gdzie X oznacza cyfrę.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1163813458

Dokumentacja adresów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:addr:*

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
literan (2023-04-19 19:14:07+00:00): упорно возвращаете кривую адреску. такое упорство достойно блокировки
M_Gaugg (2023-04-20 20:09:42+00:00): Hallo Harry, da sind leider auch wieder sehr viele Objekte darunter, die es seit vielen Jahren nicht mehr gibt. Eine einfache Google Suche würde es dir anzeigen mit "dauerhaft geschlossen" oder zeigt die Todesanzeigen der ehemaligen Inhaber. Oder du schaust auf Google Street View. Außerdem waren einige Objekte bereits angelegt und du hast sie an einem anderen Platz neu angelegt. Ich hab nun mal alles korrigiert und teilweise ergänzt, weil es waren auch Objekte darunter, die noch gefehlt haben, danke dafür. Aber bitte mehr Sorgfalt, sonst ist es nur doppelte Arbeit für alle.
literan (2023-04-19 19:13:07+00:00): опять вносите кривую, неверно заполненную адреску. Не читаете письма?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:%D0%90%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%B0#%D0%9D%D1%83%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D0%B4%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B2
literan (2023-04-19 19:09:40+00:00): зачем вы здание удалили? вандализм.
Откат, при продолжении буду просить о блокировке
NorthCrab_upload (2023-04-19 08:30:23+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o miejscowości. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, zastosuj kombinację addr:city + addr:street. Jeśli nie, przekaż nazwę miejscowości w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1091759210
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1163820327

Dokumentacja adresów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:addr:*

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Ostrymiecz (2023-04-19 09:46:58+00:00): Według mnie jest poprawnie.
Jest to miejscowość bez nazw ulic. W tym przypadku polecono mi stosować addr:place jako nazwę miejscowości.
Ostrymiecz (2023-04-19 09:48:48+00:00): Choć widzę, że zrobiłem raz samo "place", a innym razem "addr:place". Może to będzie błędem?
NorthCrab (2023-04-22 05:45:04+00:00): Po poprawce jest już okej :-)
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-18 08:12:40+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/528170737/history has tracktype = 4 that was added in this edit
Maybe it was supposed to be tracktype=grade4 ? See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Atracktype
tantomontemontetanto (2025-12-18 18:55:29+00:00): You're right. I've corrected it. Thank you very much for reporting the error :))
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-18 21:31:26+00:00): And thanks even more for fixing it!

And even more for mapping road in the first place!
dieterdreist (2025-04-04 09:57:22+00:00): Ciao Claudio, ho notato che hai riclassificato i canali in questa zona da "drain" (corrente d'acqua artificiale con bordi costruiti, per drenaggio) a "canal" (corrente d'acqua artificiale che porta acqua "utile" per trasporto o irrigazione). E`stato fatto appositamente?
Saluti
Martin
Claudio Tam (2025-04-05 15:23:46+00:00): Ciao!
I principi che usai erano questi. Quelli con larghezza d'acqua più piccola (0-3 metri) sono "drain", non contengono abbastanza acqua per essere usati per coltivare, spesso sono quasi-vuoti. Stanno a un livello un po' più basso.
Quelli più grandi (larghezza d'acqua 2-5 metri) sono "canal", hanno una portata abbastanza costante indipendente dalla pioggia, buoni per coltivare, poco margine per aumentare il flusso. Stanno a un livello più alto.
In questa zona sono presenti moltissimi canal e moltissimi drain. In alcuni casi si adattano a entrambe le descrizioni.
È una classificazione molto basica, si può cambiare se opportuno :) soprattutto canal, che nell'uso comune è qualcosa di più grosso, oltre 5 metri.
dieterdreist (2025-04-07 21:37:25+00:00): Ciao Claudio, grazie per la risposta. Capisco il criterio, anche se credo si potrebbe un po' alzare i limiti, 2 m per un "canale" non sono molti, ma non c'è nemmeno una chiara definizione, quindi per il momento potremmo anche lasciarli.

Ciao
Martin
Szymson (2023-04-19 13:57:29+00:00): Skąd wziąłeś te nazwy węzłów? Byłeś w terenie? Pojawiły się jakieś nowe znaki z nazwami?
Szymson (2023-04-19 13:58:19+00:00): https://www.s6-obwodnica-slupska.pl/mapa/
Tutaj masz poprawne nazwy węzłów i one są już dodane jako unsigned_name
Szymson (2023-04-19 13:59:33+00:00): Nie można stosować jednocześnie tagu name i unsigned_name, to jest sprzeczne z logiką. Jak może coś być jednocześnie oznakowane w terenie i nie być oznakowanym?
NorthCrab_upload (2023-04-19 08:50:37+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2490345701
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/373307634

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
jmarchon (2023-04-19 15:25:41+00:00): Hello,
May I ask why you removed this driveway? Does it no longer exist?

Thank you
Aleksey Gorelikov (2023-04-20 06:49:55+00:00): Hi jmarchon! 

We received feedback from the owner of this house, he asked us to remove this private driveway.  I don't usually remove on request if I see that the road exists, but in this case this driveway is of no use to the map and only used by the homeowner. So I decided to remove it. 

If this road is needed by the map I will restore it immediately. 

Regards Aleksey
jmarchon (2023-04-20 15:14:23+00:00): Removing private highways just because they are private is not recommended. We have the tag access=private for that. I would appreciate it if you would revert this changeset to add back the driveway.

Thank you and have a nice day
Aleksey Gorelikov (2023-08-08 20:03:37+00:00): Hello jmarchon. I appreciate the clarification, I have corrected it. Have a great day.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/135092736
Aleksey Gorelikov (2023-08-08 20:07:43+00:00): Hello. I appreciate the clarification, I have corrected it. Have a great day.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/135092736
Frans S (2023-04-21 12:39:03+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator, at random or as requested. 
I am sorry to say, but your mappings are not that accurate and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention to next points:
E: Most buildings are fair rectangular. Square them with the Q key when the object is selected.
* When buildings have protruding elements, they should be included into your mappings.
D: Please avoid that nodes of buildings link to other buildings or roads.




Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/135093648
puma515 (2023-04-19 22:08:08+00:00): Moin, Das Luftbild ist hier leider etwas schwer zu bestimmen. Das was auf dem Bing bild so wirkt wie Ackerflächen sind tatsächlich nur frisch abgemähte Wiesen. 

Ich war heute nachmittag auch in Oldenhütten und habe die umgebung bis Holstentor vor ort überprüft da ich meine letzten anpassungen noch verbessern wollte. 
 Diese paar Ackerflächen hier von dir habe ich grade schon mit angepasst du brauchst hier also nichts mehr machen. 

Ein Tipp fürs Landnutzungsmappen: Die Luftbilder beim bearbeiten wechseln so fällen oft unterschiede auf. 
Du kommst auf das Menu wen du im Bearbeitungs modus B drückst öffnet sich das menü zu weiteren Bildquellen. 

Wünsch dir weiterhin viel spass beim mappen.
gruß puma515
Frans S (2023-04-21 13:06:48+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator, at random or as requested. 
I am sorry to say, but your mappings are not that accurate and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
* Quality prevails over quantity!!
Please pay attention to next points:
B: Overlapping buildings drawn.
E: Most buildings are fair rectangular. Square them with the Q key when the object is selected.
* When buildings have protruding elements, they should be included into your mappings.
D: Please avoid that nodes of buildings link to other buildings or roads.
F: Buildings partially hidden under trees not drawn correctly. Extrapolate the rooflines.



Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/135093793
user_5359 (2023-04-23 08:42:22+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on http://www.osm.org/node/3010671260. what is the meaning of the tags
a1 = xxx ppp
a2 = zzzzz
?
Please have als a look on https://www.osm.org/node/10823918732. A speed camera inside of a building? I assume that the name isn‘t ggggggggg. Please correct this entry.
watmildon (2023-04-21 17:53:35+00:00): The common way to resolve this is to make a landuse=residential area for each named set of units.

It's also considered "good practice" to not share nodes between the roadways and landuse. Generally the roadway doesn't actually define the boundary in a meaningful way so you're free to put the landuse slightly to the side. The online editor can make that somewhat difficult so it's totally understandable. I've adjusted the Kirkland Place Condominiums landuse, let me know what you think.

Thanks for your contribution. Happy mapping!
Frans S (2023-04-20 08:31:59+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator, at random or as requested. 
I am sorry to say, but your mappings are not that accurate and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention to next points:
Your mappings are very sloppy and many mappings will be removed due to the poor quality.
Please take the time to map accurate and squared.



Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/135093989
Frans S (2023-04-20 10:35:53+00:00): Hello
Here you can see an example of your mappings.
Not squared. Inaccurate mapped.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zEI1Q-MS3oRjtV5Rc30r6MQaN6ChIYCp/view?usp=share_link
Please improve your mapping skills.
map per (2023-04-19 19:45:02+00:00): Hallo flo_k,

und wilkommen bei OpenStreetMaps!

Wegen der Bitte um ein Review der Änderung: Sieht gut aus, noch besser wäre aber ein Link auf die https (Verschlüsseltes http) Version der Webseit (1) anstelle der http Version anzugeben.

Viele Grüße
map per

(1) https://www.parken-wo-ich-will.de/
watmildon (2023-04-21 17:46:07+00:00): Hello! I suspect the loop on the right is better tagged as service=parking_aisle.  Does that seem right?
seattlefyi (2023-04-19 16:53:22+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I’ve only looked at the business closures you created, and they look… all right. Nice job keeping the addresses for the next tenant. Thanks for the edit!
Rodrigo Rega (2023-04-22 19:23:25+00:00): Buenas,

En la wiki se comenta que "landuse" no debe ir junto con "name" si se trata de un pueblo. Este parece el caso.

Gracias por tus ediciones, un saludo.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:landuse=residential#%C3%81reas_residenciales_con_nombre
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/135094684
pecege3 (2023-04-24 11:05:03+00:00): Gracias por la información. Procedo a cambiar los que había creado anteriormente. Un saludo.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/135094684