[Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?

[Marco Boeringa]

Hi all,

I now had a very preliminary and short look at some of the changesets 
involved in the Wales area, which was revealing. I now noticed most of 
these features seem to have been added by multiple users / accounts:

- Sam888, e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/413378224

- Glucosamine: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/405845733

- Dyserth: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/388818928

There may be more... All of these "users" are prolific, leave almost no 
changeset comments, and seem to be editing all day. It seems to me these 
are editors working professionally for some OSM related company.

Andy: Is there any chance the DWG could figure out which company these 
people are working for, so the company could be contacted about this 
specific issue and asked not to add these type of difficult to identify 
natural features?

There are so many changesets involved, I guess doing reverts is almost 
impossible, lest one wants to see also more useful stuff being removed 
as well, like roads and large and small patches of forest that I also 
see being part of these changesets.

I have the feeling the most offending stuff is primarily the false 
natural=heath. So maybe it is a better course of action to select the 
heath features in the affected regions in JOSM, and delete only those in 
a new changeset. I think this is by far the easiest solution. Of course, 
a bit of caution and review will be required to not include properly 
digitized heath features by regular OSM users.

Any other ideas?

Marco

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 13:09:24 +0000
> From: ael <law_ence.dev at ntlworld.com>
> To: talk-gb at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?
> Message-ID: <20170208130924.wdbn72h2r6rk7n6f at shelf.conquest>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 11:22:30AM +0000, Andy Townsend wrote:
>> On 08/02/2017 10:49, Brian Prangle wrote:
>>>   It would be great in my opinion if we moved on as a community and
>>> actually decided to act on our discussions.
> I agree that at least those changes that have not been subsequently
> modified by a "legitimate" mapper should be reverted. I thought
> something like that was going to happen.
>
> As I have noted before, I have encountered this rubbish in the South
> West and have partly corrected some areas where I have directly
> surveyed, but it was still problematical. I didn't touch adjacent areas
> although I was sure they were wrong.
>
> In the light of these discussion, I now feel more bold about perhaps
> just deleting more of this junk unless someone/ some group undertakes
> bulkish reversion.
>
> ael
>


---
Dit e-mailbericht is gecontroleerd op virussen met Avast antivirussoftware.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus