[Imports] Proposed import removal: nuclear explosion sites

Dan S danstowell+osm at gmail.com
Thu Apr 16 06:44:55 UTC 2015

2015-04-15 22:43 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>:
>> Am 15.04.2015 um 23:13 schrieb Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org>:
>> I'm totally ok with mapping craters by the way. The fact that there is a
>> crater of a certain extent is verifiable on the ground. The fact that
>> the crater was caused by an explosion with so-and-so-much energy at a
>> certain time through a military program called "Bombtastic" is not.
> This is where we differ, I think the bomb data belongs to the crater and should be kept. Without the nuclear explosions there remains just natural=crater (that's actual tagging I have seen in Nevada).
> Events like those in your example with no traces left could be deleted.

For what it's worth, I'd be in favour of Frederik's proposal. Craters
are good to map, but points indicating the location and details of
historical events are not suitable in OSM (except as attributes of
actual mapped features). Might be suitable for OHM maybe. Note that
Frederik is proposing NOT to delete entries which are associated with
a mapped crater.

Further, the data was imported and not manually added, which says to
me that the removal should be much less controversial.

It's true that the set of points in question is pretty small, and it's
easy to argue "why bother deleting them". But they are indeed
inappropriate for OSM - not because they're uninteresting, but because
they're historical not geographical data - so why prevent deletion.


More information about the Imports mailing list