Hi Ben Stillss, these changes appear to be vandalism. Reverted in changeset/164530980 and reported to the OSM Data Working Group

Hi Ben Stillss, these changes appear to be vandalism. Reverted in changeset/164530980 and reported to the OSM Data Working Group

Hi Ben Stillss, these changes appear to be vandalism. Reverted in changeset/164530980 and reported to the OSM Data Working Group

Hi Ben Stillss, these changes appear to be vandalism. Reverted in changeset/164530980 and reported to the OSM Data Working Group

Hi Ben Stillss, these changes appear to be vandalism. Reverted in changeset/164530980 and reported to the OSM Data Working Group

Hi Ben Stillss, these changes appear to be vandalism. Reverted in changeset/164531140 and reported to the OSM Data Working Group.

Hi Ben Stillss, these changes appear to be vandalism. Reverted in changeset/164531140 and reported to the OSM Data Working Group.

Hi ccoliva, these changes appear to be vandalism. Reverted in changeset/164530482 and reported to the OSM Data Working Group.

Hi ccoliva, these changes appear to be vandalism. Reverted in changeset/164530482 and reported to the OSM Data Working Group.

Hi ccoliva, these changes appear to be vandalism. Reverted in changeset/164530482 and reported to the OSM Data Working Group.

Hi ccoliva, these changes appear to be vandalism. Reverted in changeset/164530482 and reported to the OSM Data Working Group.

I've reverted this with changeset/164383169

Hi DDOLL, can you explain the tag deletions in this changeset?

Hi, spotted this odd sidewalk bridge segment: way/1309494303

Is this a mistake?

Feel free to join us in OSM-US's #local-nyc slack channel (https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C4DPLAN3U) as we hash this out together over the next few years ;)

Thanks for the typo fix ;)

I removed the fixme tag -- it's hard to have a conversation that way! But to answer your question -- these are the "official" toll zone boundaries & yes without a doubt they are wonky. But it's not the the piers were added, rather that first everything on Manhattan Island south of 61st was included, and then certain sections of highway were removed, leaving all these separate outer ways.

We will of course continue to improve this relation over time, based on survey of the toll scanners themselves. I suspect that way/1348722214 can be made much smaller, and maybe some like way/1348722217 way/1348722218 and way/1348722219 can be removed altogether.

Thanks for getting back.

If this is an ongoing professional effort, you'll need to follow OSM's "Organised Editing Guidelines" at https://osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines (pardon the British spelling -- OpenStreetMap was born in the UK and a lot of the language reflects that.)

The main things to remember are:
- Professional mapping projects need to be transparent about their work. Document the project on the OSM wiki and link to it from the profile page of each user account. Be explicit about data sources.
- Communicate with local mapping communities (NYC in this case but it looks like this account is also active in Texas and Massachusetts) and follow local mapping standards.
- Do not use OSM as an advertising platform. Verifiable factual data is welcome, but ad copy has no place here.

In addition, there are some serious problems with the quality of the edits you've been making. In this changeset:
- spammy description tag
- wrong use of operator:type tag (see operator:type=* for documentation)
- uninternationalized phone number (phone numbers should begin with an international dialing prefix, +1 in this case)
- attaching the parking node directly to the building (node should be within the building footprint)
- incorrect node placement (garage entrance is at the east end of the building, not the west end)
- unhelpful changeset comment (just "update")

Some problems in previous changesets:
- changeset/161104259 (adding parking tags to entire building when parking is only underground, and deleting building=yes tag so the building footprint no longer renders on the map)
- changeset/161106680 (distorting the shape of building way/265875658 -- again, don't attach parking nodes to the buildings and this won't be a risk)

It's not all bad, in changeset/161105543 you fixed an incorrect building address that had been there for over ten years! But before doing any further work please review & fix the problems with the existing garages, and take the necessary steps to comply with the Organised Editing Guidelines.

Thanks, J

Hi parking NYC -- welcome to OSM!

You seem to be doing a lot of work with parking garages. Can you tell us a little about your project -- who's sponsoring this, what the data sources are, etc?

Yeah that's the idea, so the corollary is: when adding a new poi, check for an existing node (maybe tagged with disused: or construction:, maybe shop=vacant, maybe just an address) before creating a new one.

It's not always so clean -- sometimes there are multiple businesses in a single space, sometimes storefronts divide in half or absorb neighborhooding storefronts. But to the extent that we can map in a way that keeps the history intact, we should.

Howdy happy_raccoon & thanks for your work!

Just so you know, it's best practice to avoid deleting closed businesses in order to help preserve the history of each location. Ideally we'd like to have a node that corresponds to a particular space and be able to tell from that node's history what businesses have opened and closed there. (See osm.wiki/Keep_the_history )

So instead of deleting, try marking the existing business as closed by using a lifecycle prefix -- in this case we'd change the tag from from amenity=bar to disused:amenity=bar. (See osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix ).

I've restored this deleted node and marked it disused in changeset/160191911 ... happy mapping, jmapb