Changeset: 95499957
Add streams and rivers from high resolution, improved NHD data, while also adding tunnel=culvert under roads to avoid crossing streams/roads. Data was manually reviewed. Also removed a lot of unnecessary data like unnamed fcode=55800.
Closed by deleted
Tags
created_by | JOSM/1.5 (17329 en) |
---|---|
source | Esri World Imagery (Clarity) Beta; Mapbox Satellite;NHD;OSM wiki tagging conventions |
Discussion
-
Comment from JriSv250
Thanks for your contributions to the waterways. However, many waterways already had ways traced through them, accompanied with Wikidata tags. Please remove the old ways after importing new ones and don't forget to copy the Wikidata tags from the old ways to the new ones. Thank you.
-
Comment from ljb_nj
Seriously, what the heck? Your massive import or edits removed waterway names and incorrectly added or changed features that were mapped based on on-the-ground site surveys. For example: You made Way 882436307 a "culvert", which it is not. I've been there - have you? You removed the attached stream "Falkenburg Branch" and replaced it with an unnamed way 882432615. This is not acceptable. Do not replace on-the-ground survey mapping with results from "NHD data", whatever that is.
- Comment from Mateusz Konieczny
-
Comment from Mateusz Konieczny
If this import was discussed then it should be mentioned in changeset tags or changeset comment (old unrelated NHD import does not mean that anyone may run mass scale NHD imports)
If this import was not discussed then it can be reverted by anyone at any time.
-
Comment from woodpeck
Happy to revert this with my DWG hat on, however, let's give the original importer a chance to reply first. Maybe there *has* been a discussion and we just haven't seen it, and maybe examples of damage are few and far between?
-
Comment from Mateusz Konieczny
And thanks for helping! Imports can be extremely valuable, but for multiple reasons it is much better to make them in smaller areas.
This makes such edits easier (possible) to review, JOSM would warn you about many mistakes, it is much easier to avoid data damage.
Similarly, discussing import before doing it allows to avoid many problems and mistakes.
-
Comment from Mateusz Konieczny
@ppjj Has you responded anywhere else?
-
Comment from ljb_nj
Apparently the author of the import is not going to reply here. I don't have the tools or skills to revert, and wouldn't try reverting a 10,000-way changeset anyway. And I think this is only one of many changesets. So I going to start manually, tediously fixing the damage in the areas I'm familiar with. I noticed also that waterways which used to be continuous are now split up into many small waterways segments, which I will try to join back up.
-
Comment from woodpeck
Please don't, I will ping the author again and if the matter cannot be settled, will run the revert myself.
-
Comment from ljb_nj
As requested, not doing anything until I hear more. FYI I checked and this seems to be 1 of 53 separate changesets with the same description, each containing 10,000 Ways. I only see new V1 Ways in these changes, so I don't know what happened to the Ways that were there before. Would they come back in a revert? Would reverting half a million Ways cause more damage?
-
Comment from woodpeck
I've started to revert these edits. It is likely to take a few days. Stuff that has been deleted will be brought back. Problems might arise where stuff from the import has been edited by other people since; we'll deal with them afterwards.
-
Comment from JriSv250
Perhaps restore the waterways that form the boundaries of municipalities first?
-
Comment from ljb_nj
Woodpeck is already reverting the whole import. The few areas I checked are already back the way they were before. I don't think partially reverting is possible, or practical. If you see any missing waterways that form municipal boundaries after it is all reverted, then yes we should fix those first. But I think that is unlikely. 'Important' waterways were already mapped before the import, which is one reason I think the import was a bad idea.
-
Comment from Mateusz Konieczny
@ljb_nj - it appears that revert was completed.
Is everything OK now?
@Woodpeck - thanks for a cleanup
-
Comment from ljb_nj
Yes the revert was completed, everything I checked is back the way it was, and much better. Thanks
- 882428549, v1
- 882428550, v1
- 882428551, v1
- 882428552, v1
- Wading River (882428553), v1
- 882428554, v1
- 882428555, v1
- 882428556, v1
- 882428557, v1
- 882428558, v1
- 882428559, v1
- 882428560, v1
- 882428561, v1
- Deep Hollow Branch (882428562), v1
- 882428563, v1
- 882428564, v1
- Dinner Point Creek (882428565), v1
- 882428566, v1
- Batsto River (882428567), v1
- 882428568, v1
Welcome to OpenStreetMap!
OpenStreetMap is a map of the world, created by people like you and free to use under an open license.
Hosting is supported by Fastly, OSMF corporate members, and other partners.
https://openstreetmap.org/copyright | https://openstreetmap.org |
Copyright OpenStreetMap and contributors, under an open license |