Sorry if I misinterpreted the changeset description; it seems by "this service" you may have been referring to OSM. I deal with thousands of SEO spam accounts claiming to be business owners or genuine customers and adding similarly blatant advertising and malformed tags to the map, so seeing what appeared to be a similar pattern here I took this to be more of the same.

In any case, you are welcome to re-add your business to the map, provided you fix the following issues:

- You should not include a description=* , or if you do it should not contain anything but a short, neutral description of the business, avoiding any unverifiable, subjective, or promotional-sounding language. See description=*#No_advertising
- image=* is a highly controversial tag so I do not recommend including it, but if you use it, it should be hosted on Wikimedia Commons or another free (libre) source, certainly not Google Maps which is prohibited as a source for OSM. See osm.wiki/Google
- opening_hours=* needs to follow the valid format, as specified on opening_hours=* . In your case, it would be: Mo-We 09:00-16:00, Th-Fr 09:00-18:00, Sa 10:00-18:00, Su 10:00-16:00

Thanks, and happy mapping!

Gotcha, thanks for the confirmation! I'd wagered based on the changeset description and source=* that the other tags were at least plausibly based on your local knowledge, so I didn't remove them.

I think we believe you that you've personally verified it. The issue here as I mentioned was the change was deleting valid map data instead of simply correcting the tags. You are by no means "required" to map every small access way like this, but neither should you delete those that other map unless there is no physical way there at all. See:

osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

Terjemahan mesin (saya yakin FajrAI mungkin bisa menyampaikannya dengan lebih baik):

Kami percaya bahwa Anda telah memverifikasinya secara pribadi. Masalahnya—seperti yang sudah saya sebutkan—adalah perubahan tersebut menghapus data peta yang valid, alih-alih sekadar memperbaiki *tag*-nya. Anda sama sekali tidak "diwajibkan" untuk memetakan setiap jalan akses kecil semacam ini, namun Anda juga sebaiknya tidak menghapus jalan yang telah dipetakan orang lain, kecuali jika memang tidak ada akses fisik sama sekali di lokasi tersebut. Lihat:

osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

(Tidak ada versi bahasa Indonesianya, tetapi Anda bisa menggunakan penerjemah otomatis.)

@Fraxi FWIW your comment was polite, helpful and constructive and I appreciate you chiming in; I didn't find it "biting" at all (not sure what you mean by "boring", I suspect I'm missing something in translation here), while also being to the point. If I'd been commenting I probably would have been even more direct, given they'd completely ignored previous comments--I'm not sure what they could have found unclear about:

> Use of Google Maps as a source is strictly prohibited by both OSM and Google policies, and may be a violation of the law.

Hi @Subs@Bluceu,

Thanks for the reply and the additional information.

> The tram stops don't have assigned numbers... the stops have a sign at each stop that says "Coral Gables Trolley".

Right, then they don't have a (publicly-marked) ref=*. A ref=* is a distinct reference number or code that uniquely identifies each stop, which I'm sure you'd agree that a sign stating the name of the network, the same for each stop, clearly is not.

As @Udarian has previously explained to you on your reverted changeset as well as on your previous changeset/186034280, this instead is the network=* as is currently tagged on the corresponding public transport bus route relations, and can also be tagged as such on each of the stops.

For more details, see the following resources:

osm.wiki/Buses#Step_1_-_Add_bus_stops_to_OpenStreetMap

ref=*

network=*#Public_transit

Thanks, and happy mapping.

Reverted incorrect refs=* on public transport stops at the request of @Udarian in changeset/186253058

changeset/186253058

Wow, what an experience! As for me, I'll never forget the sights and sounds of my first launch (Falcon Heavy Demo), where the engines were so bright it was like watching the sun rise, nor the unbelievable sight of those two boosters landing in unison right in front of us like something out of a Sci Fi movie, from a boat right offshore of the landing pads. We started Star Fleet to be able to be able to share that experience with as many folks as we could!

I'm not really on FB or Insta either these days, but if you want to get in touch Star Fleet has a WhatsApp community linked on our current launch page https://www.star-fleet.tours/current/ (we have to obfuscate it a bit to prevent spam) which I'm very active on.

Cheers!

You got that right! Especially at night, when its like a bright star rising into the heavens.

Sure thing. Best of luck!

Just FYI, while the actual map data and the map on OpenStreetMap.org updates immediately (you may need to clear cache), third-party applications and services that use OSM data typically take some time to update, so it may be anywhere from hours to months before they pick up your change.

Happy mapping!

Cool beans! I'm not on LinkedIn, but hope to see you out for a launch someday--SFT is going out for Starship Flight 13 tomorrow!

Awww, that's so kind of you--made my day! And not at all, it's yours now too. You have a great week too!

Of course, least I could do after how kind you were yourself :) And I'm really sorry about that, totally my misjudgement. I should have been more careful about the words I used--I had checked and removed/replaced similar phrasing from a couple other places before I posted, but I missed, that one, sorry. Thanks for understanding!

Thanks! I fixed up a couple of remaining issues (missing oneway:bicycle=no for bicycles, turn:lanes on Main St permitting now-invalid movements, etc) and made all the various other updates to cycleway/bicycle tagging, parking, stop signs, crossings, width and more for the western half of Eheart from note/5397656 and the Blacksburg website linked in the above news article in changeset/186187073 (and did the eastern half in changeset/186189239)

note/5397656

changeset/186187073

changeset/186189239

No worries at all, sorry if I sounded too harsh (I deal with thousands of SEO mappers 99% of whom don't even bother responding at all)--thanks for contributing to OpenStreetMap and I really appreciate your understanding and desire to improve! Overall your changes were pretty good for a brand new mapper, they just required some relatively small tweaks that's all. Thanks, and happy mapping!

Sure thing, thanks for being so polite and understanding about it! I know it isn't easy to get feedback sometimes, and in hindsight I could have been less harsh with it.

The vast majority of accounts mapping their own businesses or those of their clients never respond at all and just keep spamming, and many of the few that do respond can be very aggressive, the exact opposite of you.

Cheers, and happy mapping!

Hey Jake, thanks for your continued work in this area--definitely super helpful!

Everything looks good, just one small tip--when a sidewalk ends at an intersection, you should generally connect the resulting footway=link directly to the intersection node, since that best represents its relationship in the routing graph and especially with sidewalk=* tagging present ensures the link connects to the same point that sidewalk tagging ends--some routers will not route over the gap between them as the tagging can imply that the road should not be used for pedestrian routing in favor of the sidewalk.

Specifically, link way/1541044378 should connect to intersection node/216477857 rather than just directly to the street. I fixed this in changeset/186125242. Thanks!

way/1541044378

node/216477857

changeset/186125242

Happy mapping!

Hey jplanc,

Thanks for the update here--you know when this change was made? To note, the current lane tagging (multiple lanes=*, lanes:backward=*, etc) doesn't make sense now with this change and needs an update; I fixed it to lanes=1 for now in changeset/186124519 but feel free to adjust it further if needed based on your survey (I'm guessing? I didn't see a source=* included with this changeset)

changeset/186124519

Happy mapping!

After a discussion with the mapper on the OSM-US Slack https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C3G0Y73FC/p1784152297222719 , reverted the deletion of the entire building and instead just removed the address tagging in favor of these nodes, in changeset/186029010

changeset/186029010

On their website, the contact:mobile=* number was listed as "Text: " while the phone=* number was listed as "Phone: "; per testing the former phone number cannot actually be called, just texted. In the original changeset, I should have instead tagged that number as contact:sms=* (albeit it is a little-used key). I've fixed the tagging accordingly in changeset/186021190

changeset/186021190

Sure thing. Happy mapping!