Removed
Hi,
some wiki pages:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputes
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Vandalism
So, as last resort you could consider contacting the data working group.
Removed
The forum will not help you. Contact the Data Working Group : http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Data_working_group . It’s the only possibility to block a user. But you have to describe the case, explain why you think it’s sabotage, provide examples (object id’s or changeset numbers) and also copies of messages if you communicated to this user.
Removed
Removed
You can see the history of all versions of any object in JOSM, or using the “View history” link in the pages you posted. JOSM makes it easier to spot the difference.
Also there is a JOSM plugin, “Reverter” that can revert the changeset by changeset number.
Removed
Hi, i did not know about this thread but did a lot of corrections in cambodia.
I fixed nearly all AL4-Boundaries, which were terribly wrong (missing or overlapping Boundary-segments, no admin_level=4 and no boundary=administrative).
you can see the result at my Boundary-Map (see my signature). Open cambodia and right click “select all children”.
Regards
walter
Removed
Removed
Looks more like a bad solution than vandalism to me…
Removed
Connecting side streets to dual carriage ways… or were they properly connected before?
Removed
Knowing nothing of the area but what I see in JOSM with Bing imagery, it almost looks like an attempt to use a single point to map a “complex intersection”. Almost like they were trying to create one of the issues in the US Tiger imports like http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/TIGER_fixup#Braided_streets instead of http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtraffic_signals#Complex_intersections
But it looks like none of the intersections in actually have a single point as one of the main road’s ways is not connected to the side street.
Looks more like the person editing does not understand what they are doing rather than intentional sabotage. Not sure how to educate them however.
Unfortunately, I can’t find it now, but I recently hit on an OSM Wiki page, that kind of “recommended” a similar way of digitizing to prevent false routing instructions in some instances. However, that Wiki page referred to a rather specific junction topology situation that I can’t fully recall now. It had something to do with the routing software giving a false “go left / go right” while the actual routing just needed to be “go straight on”, but the topology of the specific junction type would cause difficulty with this. Connecting to a common point like here, was suggested to solve this, causing a similar “zig-zag” in the ways, but apparently a higher chance of correct routing instruction.
If someone else knows which Wiki page I am referring to based on this description, please post the link here, because I can not find it again…
Removed
When creating a dual carriage way, one has to connect all the intersecting streets to one or both of the lanes, depending on the ground situation. Here the editor seems to have thought it better/easier to just create one intersection. It looks like hell, but in fact it is an acceptable rendering of reality, since technically the lanes are not separated at the junction. So I’d point out with some examples from other dual carriage ways what the general practice is on OSM.
(I am assuming the intersections in fact connect side roads to both lanes, can’t check easily right now as I’m on a smartphone)
Removed