[Imports] US Golf Courses from GNIS

Josh Doe josh at joshdoe.com
Fri Dec 23 03:39:39 UTC 2011

Revert is done, see changeset #10184494:

For the two nodes that someone edited I went ahead and made them areas
from Bing and added website and other detail I could glean.

Golf Geek, if you'd like help I'd be happy to split your original file
into state-sized chunks.  I'll volunteer to merge all of Virginia's
golf courses. Also, I'd be interested to know your method for reducing
the ~6000 nodes to ~4000 (i.e. perhaps provide the script you used).


On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Josh Doe <josh at joshdoe.com> wrote:
> I just pulled in the changeset, and only three nodes have been changed:
> Name corrected:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1556624529/history
> Position moved:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1556638779/history
> And deleted:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1556629698/history
> I'd suggest this be reverted tonight, keeping the two corrected nodes.
> Also, when we re-import this (more slowly), I don't think we need any
> of the gnis tags except for the ID, which should probably use
> gnis:feature_id.
> If I get a chance and no objections, I'll revert this tonight (~8
> hours from now).
> -Josh
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Josh Doe <josh at joshdoe.com> wrote:
>> I've noticed in my area golf course nodes added that already exist:
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1556625188
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1556629688
>> and others
>> I support reverting this changeset ASAP.
>> Golf Geek,
>> Let's instead take the work you've done and split it up into state
>> sized chunks (e.g. via Osmosis). Then several contributors including
>> yourself can manually merge the nodes a state at a time. Thank you for
>> your interest in this, and for coming forward on the mailing list.
>> Trust me that this is not the first time this kind of thing has
>> happened, but you did the right thing coming here and letting us know.
>> Regards,
>> -Josh
>> On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 2:03 AM, Toby Murray <toby.murray at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> More problems I found by just downloading all leisure=golf_course
>>> objects and randomly browsing around some of Kansas/Nebraska with Bing
>>> imagery.
>>> Can't idenfity on aerial. I could just be missing it. Or GNIS position
>>> might be off by a lot. Some are in the middle of a town without so
>>> much as a full block of grass anywhere near them. Or it may have been
>>> closed but is still in GNIS. It is unlikely that it is a new golf
>>> course. Bing imagery seems to be pretty recent (2010) in most areas I
>>> looked at.
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1556624422
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1556638495
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1556635779
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1556635714
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1556624015
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1556625367
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1556625957
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1556631507
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1556638863
>>> Two golf courses in close proximity that are probably the same course,
>>> maybe known by two different names:
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1556638410
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1556627728
>>> and
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1556624801
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1556639241
>>> Were these not in GNIS or were they excluded because of an existing
>>> way? Could have maybe used GNIS data to add a name to the existing
>>> way:
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/46342164
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/43332671
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/42280171
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/98180901
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/129025203
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/126614718
>>> Toby
>>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 11:27 PM, Toby Murray <toby.murray at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Golf Geek <golfgeek2011 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> After reviewing the Import/Guidelines wiki, I realize I should have posted
>>>>> here first, but here's a quick "after action report" on a recent import.
>>>>> Better late than never. :)
>>>> Why didn't you read this before the import? This should not be viewed
>>>> as optional.
>>>>> I noticed that although USGS GNIS data had been imported into OSM in the
>>>>> past, the US golf course locations provided as GNIS Locales had not been
>>>>> included.
>>>>> So, I retrieved GNIS Locales with "Golf" in the name from
>>>>> http://geonames.usgs.gov/ and saved them as OSM nodes, using these tags:
>>>>> gnis:Class = Locale
>>>>> gnis:County = [various]
>>>>> gnis:ST_alpha = [various]
>>>>> gnis:id = [various]
>>>>> leisure = golf_course
>>>>> name = [various]
>>>>> source = USGS GNIS
>>>>> From the list of ~6000 nodes, I removed any that overlapped with existing
>>>>> OSM golf_course nodes or ways.
>>>> You apparently failed to take into account how terrible GNIS spatial
>>>> accuracy can actually be:
>>>> Your node: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1556636801
>>>> Existing way: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/70764331
>>>> Yes, that over a mile off. This is why the import guidelines say to
>>>> discuss it with the community FIRST. There is much collected knowledge
>>>> about imports in the community which can prevent such common mistakes.
>>>>> The remaining 4421 nodes were then added as Changeset 10168800.
>>>>> The data license is OK (USGS GNIS has been used before), and the new nodes
>>>>> should not screw up existing data (although I am sure they are not perfect),
>>>>> so hopefully this import will be a good starting point for further manual
>>>>> edits.
>>>> With nodes that are off by a mile, I am doubtful of this claim. So
>>>> far, I have only looked at that one node so far. Others, please check
>>>> more in your area. If mine is an outlier then I'll just fix it. If
>>>> there are many more that are as bad as this one, I would propose
>>>> reverting this import, especially since import guidelines were not
>>>> followed.
>>>> Toby
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Imports mailing list
>>> Imports at openstreetmap.org
>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports

More information about the Imports mailing list