<div dir="ltr">The bit that worries me about these 3 listings is that the addresses that can be found by searching, don't match up with the locations shown<div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Thanks<div><br></div><div>Graeme</div><div><br></div></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On 27 May 2017 at 11:08, <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:forster@ozonline.com.au" target="_blank">forster@ozonline.com.au</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi<br>
<br>
I have deleted these in the past, eg <a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/47218168" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.openstreetmap.org/<wbr>changeset/47218168</a><br>
<br>
I believe that they should be deleted on the principle of Verifiability<br>
<a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/<wbr>wiki/Verifiability</a><br>
"OSM data should, as far as is reasonably possible, be verifiable ... a tag/value combination is verifiable if and only if independent users when observing the same feature would make the same observation every time"<br>
<br>
I would support deletion if these conditions were all met:<br>
<br>
a) it feels wrong (eg a tag in the middle of a road or an empty field)<br>
b) no address tags in node<br>
c) their website "Contact" does not include a physical address and<br>
d) no reply to changeset comments<br>
<br>
And as Warin says: Remember this may be their first contact with and mapping in OSM ... go easy.<br>
<br>
Tony<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
These edits are just nodes of a business placed on a road without a physical building coincidentally mapped.<br>
Is this allowed?<br>
Does a business need to have a physical building presence to be included in OSM?<br>
If these nodes were placed near the road instead would that be ok?<br>
<br>
*Corrected link:* <a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/TechTronix%20Webmaster/history#map=17/-26.52661/153.08892" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.openstreetmap.<wbr>org/user/TechTronix%<wbr>20Webmaster/history#map=17/-<wbr>26.52661/153.08892</a> <<a href="http://www.oznativeplants.com/plantdetail/Lawyer-Vine/Calamus/muelleri/zz.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.oznativeplants.com<wbr>/plantdetail/Lawyer-Vine/Calam<wbr>us/muelleri/zz.html</a>><br>
<br>
One is an extra node on top of a junction node.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Talk-au mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Talk-au@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.or<wbr>g/listinfo/talk-au</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>