Thank you! I realised this about he tag after doing some more reading on coastline tagging and debugging osm.wiki/OSM_Inspector/Views/Coastline after the topic of the flooded tiles in this area came up on Twitter. It is too long since I have been an active mapper... cheers!

Why did you remove the coastline tag from this relation?

In this changeset several stretches of abandoned railway have been re-tagged as rail - have they been re-opened?

osm.org/way/412114683 does not look like a park; it looks like private housing and gardens.

osm.org/way/180138033 does not look like a park; it looks like a traffic island which has been tagged for the renderer.

In this changeset you have deleted a couple of sections of residential street. osm.org/way/412427441 and osm.org/way/180183982 - why?

Cheers nikospag. You might have noticed now that I revoked JayCBR's block early this morning, at his contrite request. And I know the edit patterns of Γιαννης 4 are a serious ongoing problem and I would like to take harsher action, but 96 hours is the longest block available through the regular interface, without a special request to the sysadmins.

I plan to set out the problem with Γιαννης 4 to the rest of the DWG and ask for a longer term block on that account.

nikospag phew! I am glad i have not incurred your wrath.

The longer block was applied after consultation with DWG because we hope for and expect better from a serious mapper like JayCBR. I didn't take a screenshot but the edit was definitely a short, isolated area in the shape of an enormous cock and balls.

This dispute originates in the continued problematic edits of Γιάννης 4 who has been a serious persistent problem for DWG with a series of dubious edits and a long history of non-contact with the community, BUT it does not serve to retaliate against potential vandalism with more vandalism. I know I should have dealt with Γιάννης 4's edits sooner, I wasn't available over the weekend and things deteriorated. :/

I do carry a big stick yes but I try not to wield it most of the time.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 38849997 where the changeset comment is:

I'm really surprised to see a phallic symbol scrawled on the map in the midst of an otherwise constructive looking changeset. Reverting on behalf of DWG.

dear Marek,

In this changeset and others you seem to be carrying out mass imports of buildings and then later deleting some of your edits.

Have the imports been discussed with the local mapper community and on the imports@ mailing list?

We at the Data Working Group are concerned that you are carrying out a mass edit of unknown quality without discussion with the affected community.

Can i ask what is the source of the street address and house number data? Is it from physical survey?

cheers

Following up from my comment on osm.org/changeset/37090506 - have you discussed these mechanical edits in advance with the wider community as advised in osm.wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct ?

dear nikospag,

This looks like a really large and significant mechanical edit. Has this change in tag been discussed on a mailing list or forum and a consensus reached with others mapping the road network in Greece?

There are guidelines for large-scale automated edits here: osm.wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct

In this changeset you've added a motorway which does not exist - osm.org/way/388891377

OpenStreetMap is an attempt to make an accurate map of the world. If a feature is not observable "on the ground" it should not be included in OSM. Many people increasing depend on the accuracy of the road network in OSM for routing purposes.

I'm reverting this change and may have to revert others you've made on behalf of the Data Working Group, as you make it difficult to tell which are bona fide edits and which are imaginary features.

Also, please observe good practise by adding meaningful descriptions to your changesets rather than the default "no comment"

dear cam98,

In this changeset you have added a lot of duplicate data for roads where they already exist on the map. Please don't do this. OpenStreetMap is like a wiki, where a collective effort produces better content. In adding duplicate data disconnected from the existing road network, these edits detract from the integrity of the whole.

dear cameronk1998,

In this changeset you've added a highway=proposed leading to nowhere that seems to have no basis in fact. OpenStreetMap is a shared attempt to create an accurate map of the world.

Could you please explain where this data is coming from?

Also, it is good practise to leave meaningful descriptions in the "comment" field of your changes so other mappers can follow along.

dear xproBeku,

Regarding your change to osm.org/node/3912708199 - If you don't know the name of a place, please don't write that down in OpenStreetmap, just leave the name tag blank.

I've now reverted this changeset on behalf of the Data Working Group - see osm.org/changeset/35763125

The changeset source claims that it derives from Bing data. However the tags on the nodes and ways do look as if this was automatically added from another source (e.g. an import or "mechanical edit") and there's significant duplicate data which does not take into account existing mapping. I wonder if the mapper can add any comment on this?

dear aitolos, Alex3271,

As of yesterday afternoon, when I saw Γιάννης 4 had started editing again, I did a mass revert of changes from that account and also Γιάννης 1; I didn't touch the third account that you mentioned as it has been inactive for a 5 months and, as you suggest, the hard work of unpicking has already been done by hand :/

I applied the longest block I can with my privileges and am consulting on how to extend the block, and I'll keep a close eye on the three accounts for a while longer.

The tools I used to do the mass revert are all available on github for anyone to use, though the interfaces are raw, so caveat editor. https://github.com/woodpeck/osm-revert-scripts

I hope this is enough for now?

x Jo aka zool