BTW, OSM forum discussion thread for this change: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/lake-ontario-lake-america/146975

Thanks!

It seems the GNIS update was already pushed through per the above; my understanding was that it normally needs to go before the Board of Geographic Names and various procedural steps before it becomes official, but then again the current administration hasn't been one for following established procedure and due process...

In any case, per a [discussion in the OSM-US Slack](https://osmus.slack.com/archives/CCJ2P6KCH/p1787853493613639) and a request from a forum admin, I created a OSM Forum thread for this change: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/lake-ontario-lake-america/146975

Community discussion thread for this change: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/lake-ontario-lake-america/146975

I see nobody commented on changeset/188110442 yet to notify them of the revert and the reasons for it as is standard practice (nor was it originally referenced here), so I did so.

changeset/188110442

I also pinged the DWG to give them a heads up about this, as it is likely to be a reoccurring problem.

Although I am seeing https://edits.nationalmap.gov/apps/gaz-domestic/public/gaz-record/970427 updated when I checked again just now? I seemed to remember it took much more time for the Gulf of Mexico and had to go through a whole process first.

As far as I'm aware, the official name hasn't been updated yet in GNIS, the official register of names by the US government and the source of official_name:en-US=* . Therefore, it is premature to change this, which I assume is what @Shrinks99 is referring to. See the Gulf of Mexico discussion where the same standard was applied: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/gulf-of-america-gulf-of-mexico/124571/5

Thanks for looking into it. Interestingly, way/112628723 (same number as this node) is actually in France, but in a small town near Boulonge-Sur-Mer rather than in Paris as this node's tags would imply (and there is no relation of that number).

way/112628723

SEO spam, advertising and mistagging by commercial mappers is strictly prohibited on OpenStreetMap and is subject to immediate removal and possible further consequences for your account. Please see osm.wiki/About_OpenStreetMap_for_SEO_mappers for more information.

Reverted adding SEO spam taqs with blatant advertising and malformed values in changeset:

changeset/187918303

Of course! And thanks again for your work here!

Sure thing, happy to help out! And thanks again for the update!

Hi, thanks for updating this!

I resolved the note you created for this, note/5468682 , since you added the details here.

Just FYI, the standard phone number format for NANP regions, including the US, is +1-NNN-NNN-NNNN (with +1 NNN-NNN-NNNN and the international +1 NNN NNN NNNN also being sometimes seen), see phone=*#United_States Also, it seems you accidentally used a `_` instead of a `;` between `italian` and `pizza` in cuisine=* I fixed both for you in changeset

changeset/187814874

Thanks, and happy mapping!

I also commented and resolved the note you created for this: note/5468678

Hi!

Thanks for updating this gas station location, and adding the address. I noticed the brand=* and brand:wikidata=* were still set to Citgo, so I updated them as well as the name=* and website=* of the attached convenience store (also still set to Citgo) and added/refined some other tags in changeset/187814392

changeset/187814392

Thanks, and happy mapping!

Furthermore, the added tags were for a completely different business in an entirely different state (as is obvious from the added description), so I reverted them completely in changeset:

changeset/187623602

That would be great!

BTW, this case you fixed was actually more incorrect than most, as in this case the parent entity of the library system was not the town at all, but rather a association of multiple counties (Montgomery and Floyd)--so it wasn't just imprecise but clearly flat-out wrong. Not sure how I let that one slip through!

Thanks for correcting what was originally my mistake here!

Just FYI, I see operator:wikipedia=* I originally added way back when (that still refers to the town as the operator rather than the country library system) wasn't removed or updated here along with operator:wikidata=*, so I removed it for consistency in changeset/187554555

changeset/187554555

> (A lot of Google's information has been added and maintained by volunteers, so I consider it unfair that our own shared information is considered their property)

Ah, well unfortunately that's pretty much how any of the proprietary internet platforms operate by default, and is in the ToS that every Google Maps contributor agrees to when submitting their information/suggestions--it is only natural that they want to exploit and profit off their data and their monopoly position with it as much as they can, to benefit their bottom line.

Why I personally struggle with understanding is why so many people voluntarily work for free mapping for a trillion dollar megacorperation like Google that has complete control of the data they contribute, when OpenStreetMap exists. But unfortunately, that's the world we live in...

Thanks @HaritaDuzenlemeHesabi , really appreciate a local expert chiming in!

As an additional reminder @sudoers , while you of course have personal knowledge of the business, just keep in mind that use of Google Maps as a source for OSM is strictly prohibited by both OSM and Google policies, and may violate local law -- see osm.wiki/Google for more details. Therefore, it cannot be used by other mappers as a source for verifying a bullishness or information about it. Even if that wasn't the case, it still wouldn't be a reliable source of verification in cases of uncertainty like this, as anyone can add their business to it and they have looser standards for inclusion than we have--not to mention they don't always enforce them, e.g. almost every SEO spam POI I clean up from OSM has a pin on Google, even ones that are completely nonsensical (e.g. a "party store" in the middle of a public park).

Happy mapping!

Thanks!

Overall looks pretty good, but a couple issues here (at least with the end state; there appear to have been more changes in further of your changesets:

- The recreation center building is completely missing any building=* tag, probably building=civic . Additionally, it is dual-tagged tagged as a landuse=*, which it itself isn't (leisure=sports_center accurately covers it)
- way/1548675765 and way/1548675764 shouldn't be two separate ways as there is only a painted line between them. As I've reminded you previously, the general rule in OSM is to only map separate ways when there is physical separation (barrier, median, verge, etc) between them. Furthermore, only way/1548675765 is tagged oneway, with way/1548675764 left as the default two-way (which is not correct even absent that rule).
- Around that same location, you've updated the roads but not the crosswalk (way/1170368989), leaving it in the wrong location not near the actual roads.
- Not all of them were directly touched by you, but way/911119293, way/911119292, way/734351162 and way/734351159 are all two-ways (the latter tagged incorrectly as a one-way) that form the perimeter of the lot and/or serve through traffic, not parking aisles.
- way/1548674640 that you tag as just landuse=grass seems to in fact be some kind of specialized recreation area, not just an empty grass patch (in a median, verge, etc.)

Fixed in changeset/187253785

changeset/187253785