Parked image proposals

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Parking mapnik.jpg

The following are Featured image proposals which were put forward, but they have been "parked".


Parked means they could be used, but the proposal didn't really go anywhere for some reason. They have been moved here because they could still be rescued, but we are aiming to keep the Featured image proposals page a bit shorter, because otherwise it gives the wrong impression, that we have lots of good proposals to choose from (not the case!).

Reasons for parking a proposal:

  • open licensing - We need to hear back from the copyright owner to gain permissions (we require open licensed images without commercial restrictions, and it's useful if a clear statement can be made here on the image description page, by a user who is clearly the copyright owner)
  • license compliance - The image depicts a nice use of OpenStreetMap, but sadly the use is not compliant with the OpenStreetMap License (usually means they don't give us adequate credit. See Legal FAQ ) This may be resolved over time if the user can be cajoled into complying. Note these are legal requirements, so we should approach people nicely, but it's not just so that they can have a featured image.
  • quality - It was felt that the image didn't meet the quality threshold. It wasn't quite worthy of being "image of the week". Images which are kind of OKish may be useful to keep as parked images here, so that we can rescue the proposal in the event of a drought in suggested images (which happens quite a lot actually!). Images which are pretty hopeless can just be removed from the list to save space
  • repetition - or other considerations. This amounts to a kind of quality consideration, but it may be that an image is parked because, even though it's a great image, we have already featured a similar one... or some other consideration.

Note that these states can often be resolved through a process of discussion (and tracking down the right people to discuss). You are welcome to continue discussing the image proposals here, and move them back to Featured image proposals if they seem like a good proposal again.

Indian Railways Network Connectivity Map

Railway network connectivity map of the populated regions of India.

"Indian Railways Network Connectivity Map with cities and population density"

It's in my eyes also a very nice, interesting map. --Kolossos (talk) 13:46, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Image mentions (in small print) that it is OSM data, but the info on the page doesn't ... ---Aseerel4c26 (talk) 00:55, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
Another (perhaps minor) disadvantage is that we've already featured a lot of awesome map images by User:Planemad. -- Harry Wood (talk) 13:54, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
I've no concerns with the license and so I would like to feature this nice map as iotw. --LordOfMaps (talk) 14:19, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
This is a bad example of OSM attribution. You really have "no concerns"? Do you think we should not take our own license for real? However, do it. Not the first image with license issues. It does not get better by just ignoring! Sorry for having a look here again... ;-) --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 23:46, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
In my eyes it isn't a perfect attribution, but it is an attribution including the author (Openstreetmap Project) and the license (cc-by-sa), so it should be OK. And I take our own license for real. --LordOfMaps (talk) 12:24, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Aside form license issues (which I think is minor) ...this is now a very old image. Also we have featured User:Planemad's nice maps before, so I think it's a bit repetitive -- Harry Wood (talk) 13:59, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Ballonmap with OpenLayers

de = Eine Bürgeriniative gegen Atommüll in einem Braunschweiger Wohngebiet nutzt OSM und OpenLayers zur Visualiserung einer Luftballon-Aktion. Die Ballonwolke, die man in der Karte sieht, symbolisiert die mögliche Ausbreitung der Radioaktivität bei einem Unfall.

en = A citizens' initiative against nuclear waste in a residential area uses OSM and OpenLayers for the visualisation of a ballon-action. The ballon-cloud, visible in the map, symbolises the spreading of radioactivity in case of an accident.

Screenshot from:
Baselayer: mapnik
The author allowed the usage in the wiki. The author agreed to a free license of his work.

Proposed as itow. --Bma (talk) 17:03, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the proposal (with those already translated captions which we will put on the file page in any case), Bma! Three issues:
  • I am not that much impressed by "just" an OpenLayers map with the standard mapnik layer and some bitmap markers (however it is still great that OSM is used!; also see).
  • Second, the image should be freely licensed (for everyone, not just for the wiki)­ – however, this can be easily fixed: the mapnik tiles are cc-by-sa 2.0 anyway and the icons and those few markers may not be protected (a free license statement by the author would be good).
  • Third, admittedly I have a bit stomach-ache featuring such a political topic which does a (at least scientifically) doubtful comparison of radioactive fallout and balloon landing locations (that does not mean that I am against this project). Next week we feature a map of bird deaths by wind energy (just an illustrative example)? I mean, it is hard to find the right balance of promoting those quite political opinions then.
I am personally sorry for rather downvoting your proposal. I'd like to hear others' opinions. --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 21:38, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
The author agreed to a free license of his work. And of course it was rather an symbolic action than a scientifical experiment. --Bma (talk) 17:51, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your response, still, a license is missing at File:Ballon_map_v1.png#Licensing. I think the only possible license for the whole is the same license which the basemap is licensed under (due to its "share alike" requirement). So, the author should release his work under "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 License" (auf Deutsch) if possible.
And who is the author of the balloon map? On the source website I cannot find a license info, but on the opposite I find e.g. "Downloads und Kopien dieser Seite sind nur für den privaten, nicht kommerziellen Gebrauch gestattet." at [1]. This is nearly the opposite of a free license. --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 19:53, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
The author agreed to a "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 License". (Changed on the file-page.) --Bma (talk) 11:37, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, but where can I see this? The website still has the same (opposite) copyright statements, if I see correctly. --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 22:47, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
You wanted to hear others' opinions: I have no problem with the image. I would feature it as itow. It is a good example for the multifaceted using-possibilities of OSM.--LordOfMaps (talk) 12:55, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. Yes, it is a a good example (still a quite random one - see "first"). As said, it is issue of neutrality or not. However, many iotw are "adverts" in some form (the only difference is that here it is a quite political/opinion advert – somehow). Good, old Harry, please "decide" or comment! ;-) --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 22:47, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Due to the fact that there is no iotw for week 52 and that this is the best current proposal, I would feature this image today. --LordOfMaps (talk) 09:17, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Main problem with the image is, it's a very straightforward use of the 'standard' map style. It would seem like the only reason for making it image of the week is not because the image itself is particularly interesting, but because we're promoting this anti-nuclear project. If it was a more interesting map e.g. using some heatmap technology or at least a custom style... then it makes it less about promoting, and more about showing an interesting image. I think it's just an "OK" image. Keep it as a proposal in case we're desperate -- Harry Wood (talk) 18:06, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
...but also why don't you use a custom style? :-) You could make your radiation map more interesting to look at with a some CloudMade editor style for example -- Harry Wood (talk) 00:30, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Big US Roundabout


Caption: "Big, for the US, roundabout. US drivers are not accustomed to roundabouts, let alone these big roundabouts.

Glassman (talk) 22:10, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Not sure I see the significance of this. Is it true that US drivers are not accustomed to roundabouts? Is this is a famous junction in the US? (found it here on the map) -- Harry Wood (talk) 10:48, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Reallife Openstreetmap Wallpaper

A reallife OpenStreetMap wallpaper with clothes hooks on top

I made a reallife Openstreetmap wallpaper for my vestibule. I used a the MapBox Pencil style as starting point to make this wallpaper. The process is described [on my blog]. You can use the flickr photo I uploaded here, or any of the photos in the blog post. They are all CC-BY-SA.

Thanks to [Harry Wood] for pointing me towards this wiki.

--flowolf 14:46, 22 Jan 2014 (UTC)

Wow, that's a cool project. I'm in favour of featuring this! :) --Tordanik 16:05, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Great! I'm pretty sure that this will be the next iotw. Why not feature it for the next week today? --LordOfMaps (talk) 16:52, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Nice!!! Lord: Gogogo! ;-) Some stuff needs to be done until it is fine (I guess you know my suggested process and hints here). E.g. OSM attribution is missing (at least on the file page but if possible it should also be on flickr/blog, of course). --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 22:26, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
I added a link to the Openstreetmap licence on all pages. hth --flowolf 07:36, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Yes, that's good, thank you. Do you know by chance if the mapbox pencil tiles (you used them, right?) are freely licensed? I could not find anything and the TOS are quite restrictive. I guess they will have no problem to freely license this single photo, but one has to ask in this case. --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 21:40, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Well the pencil tiles just another raster tile set from Mapbox (not really to do with vector tiles). For mapbox tiles the general rule is "copyright Mapbox" (as a "produced work") which I suppose means we're not allowed to use anything from them for a featured image, without asking. Becomes a bit flimsy when it's a photo of a printout, but it is an issue. This was also the problem with the OSMBuildings proposal above.
Specifically we need to ask them if we can open license the image we're using for image of the week (because we're sticking to the rule, open licensed images only) I guess we could ask them to grant us blanket permission to open license any image feature a bit of mapbox map which we're using for image of the week.
-- Harry Wood (talk) 22:24, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Good, thank you! When that issue here is solved and clarified this info needs to be incorporated into Mapbox (TODO).
I guess they will not have a problem with granting such a license. A blanket license may be legally a bit doubtful as anybody here could "feature" a image here, and so scraping of their tiles. Or, hey, we use bigmap and... stop. ;-) Just joking.
Yes, one could argue that the specifics of Mapbox's style are not visible in that photo but that is quite unsafe.
Anyway, I think we need a license from them.
A side note: I am not happy about those not-in-any-fucking-way freely licensed map tiles. Makes me think about if I really would like to feature such tiles … having thought about it one more day: it is great that they use OSM and advertising OSM by this in their products. But I would wish they would play the using-free-content game nicer. Featuring this reallife wallpaper with the unfree tiles is fine for me (if we get a license for the tile use in this photo, of course). --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 22:56, 23 January 2014 (UTC), update: 22:44, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
I chatted to Alex Barth of Mapbox about this. He was distracted another issue with this image. Although he loves the image and the wallpaper use, he wasn't happy with the blog post which encourages scraping their tile servers, in breach of the Mapbox Terms of Use... and in fact he wasn't happy with this being a featured image for that reason. He said he was going to contact flowolf to suggest some changes to the blog post.
But I did also talk to him about copyrights. He wasn't comfortable with blanket permission, but he said he's fine legally speaking with the use of this image for image of the week, indeed it didn't feel it is a significant form of copying to invoke any kind of copyright anyway. I asked him to state this in the discussion here, for clarity in relation to this image, and also for the OSMBuildings image above, and suggested he or somebody from Mapbox could proactively join in and do this any future images we'd like to use (be clear that we're allowed to open license the images on a case-by-case basis)
...waiting for him, or somebody from Mapbox to do this.
-- Harry Wood (talk) 14:21, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
note: This is now already "featured" in the Wochennotiz weekly blog post: WN 184. --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 02:52, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

OSMBuildings in a sketch style

OSMBuildings sketch style.png

Spotted this on reddit. Suggested caption:

OSMBuildings is an open source 3D buildings display engine for web maps. Here we see the buildings in a new 'sketch' style creating a cartoon graphical effect. See this as a dynamic 3D map

-- Harry Wood (talk) 01:05, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Nice! Where did you find the "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 License"? By the way: isn't an OSM attribution missing on the slippy map? Are the mapbox tiles (used in the image) freely licensed? I only saw that they are copyrighted (details in their TOS). --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 22:59, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Well it's all OpenStreetMap data we're looking at, therefore I presume I'm entitled to share this image on the wiki CCBYSA, but yeah it's good point. For some reason I hadn't noticed that the website is pretty poor at giving credit to OpenStreetMap. Maybe because it had OSM in the name I was assuming we were credited. But now I've emailed the developer suggesting improved credit text. -- Harry Wood (talk) 17:29, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
At the image license here: not everything is OSM data - the styles (mapbox's tiles and the drawing style buildings) are not. The ODbL only applies to the data in a "produced work" (and I think a map is a "produced work"). Due to ODbL section 4.3 (produced work) section 4.2 (notices) does not apply and so section 4.4 (share alike) does not apply. Maybe I have misunderstood the ODbL here, I am happy get to know better. :-)
At the attribution on the OSMBuildings site: thank you! --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 22:55, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
Also see #Reallife Openstreetmap Wallpaper regarding mapbox's tile licensing. --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 00:46, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

"Tatort" (German crime television series)

In the episode "Winternebel" (broadcasted on Oct 5th, 2014) the investigators in many different moments use OSM Maps in various forms: A big map on a board, a map shown on a tablet and a folder with one page maps extracted from OSM. I have made good screenshots which (at least according to German law) could be used as picture citations, but certainly not under CC-SA. Maybe I should ask the copyright holder, or what else could be done to give a bit of publicity to this way OSM data has been used? ... ----Hatzfeld (talk) 07:43, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Hmm yeah I guess it's a similar situation to the nice story of #The Spanish gendarmerie using OpenStreetMap in the maritime border control. We can use images from that under a sort of "fair use rationale", but maybe for Image of the week we should try to be more properly open licensed. -- Harry Wood (talk) 11:45, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Here are the images. Today I have got the permission to publish them in this wiki, with the copyright note "Tatort: Winternebel" mit Klara Blum (Eva Mattes), © SWR.

"Tatort: Winternebel" mit Klara Blum (Eva Mattes), © SWR
"Tatort: Winternebel" mit Klara Blum (Eva Mattes), © SWR
"Tatort: Winternebel" mit Klara Blum (Eva Mattes), © SWR
"Tatort: Winternebel" mit Klara Blum (Eva Mattes), © SWR
"Tatort: Winternebel" mit Klara Blum (Eva Mattes), © SWR
"Tatort: Winternebel" mit Klara Blum (Eva Mattes), © SWR
"Tatort: Winternebel" mit Klara Blum (Eva Mattes), © SWR
----Hatzfeld (talk) 21:07, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

"Today I have got the permission to publish them in this wiki". Thanks. Not really enough for image of the week though I'm afraid. We're going for "open licensed" images. We could mention this or use the image elsewhere perhaps. For now though I think we need to reject this -- Harry Wood (talk) 00:55, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

OSM Tchoutchou

OSM Tchoutchou uses the railway network of OSM. Maybe some screen capture could be interesting. --FrViPofm (talk) 22:12, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the proposal! It is quite interesting, nothing really new (at least the OSM-part), though. A caption would be needed. Could you please suggest one? What is and what is Tchoutchou? Ah, I think I got it. Tchoutchou is the sound of trains? Funny! :-)
Oh, but... the attribution of OSM is done very bad. It is hidden behind the side bar: So, no(!), until this is fixed. --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 22:22, 18 January 2014 (UTC) updated 22:36, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Now the attribution is on the left side, good. It is visible now. "Map data © OpenStreetMap contributors, CC-BY-SA" is not really correct. The data is ODbL – just the tiles are CC-BY-SA. I would also suggest not to apply an additional 0.5 opacity for the attribution line. That gets close to be unreadable.
Sadly nobody else comments here. --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 18:56, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
This is a pretty old suggestion now. I wonder whether it's been superseded by other live rail displays since it came out. But maybe still a good suggestion. I had thought it was just an interesting overlay, and not much to do with OSM... but you say it uses OSM railway network data too?
MapQuest folks wrote the wiki page here: MapQuest#MapQuest-hosted map tiles and this has since been updated to tell people to mention ODbL instead. Personally I find "Imagery © Mapquest" to be quite a strange thing to write, but those are the recommendations there. See my comment here Talk:MapQuest#Credit text
-- Harry Wood (talk) 10:05, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
Too old now and no reply, but could stillresurrect this if someone proposed it again -- Harry Wood (talk) 17:46, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Estate agent mash-up

Map mash-up: is it an estate agent? not sure

Would be more interesting if it wasn't using the "standard" style, but on the whole I think it's visually quite interesting, and it's quite a nice "down to earth" usage example. Would be an OK image of the week.

Somebody who speaks german could ask them if we can have an open licensed screenshot image -- Harry Wood (talk) 13:41, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, "OK" somehow, yes, but not really overwhelming. ;-) Hence, currently *I* am not inclined to do any effort for this image. I am not at twitter in addition (and don't want to be).
It is some (internal) RFID chip-based container management/tracking solution/company/thingy (judging from the screenshot text) using Leaflet with markers (apparently using different images and marker clustering) and a search through the markers in a sidebar. Looking again at it, the search side bar with the info boxes is quite nice. As you say... the mashup does it. Don't we have something similar of a non-profit humanitarian aid organization? ;-) --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 13:58, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
parking now since it's old -- Harry Wood (talk) 17:47, 20 September 2015 (UTC) real time bus map.png

The website displays real time locations of public transport buses in the city of Meran - Merano and uses OpenStreetMap for their custom-made basemap. This could be interesting because Meran already already has some history with OSM (in 2007, they were among the first public entities to release their data as open data specifically for OSM).

The map does correctly attribute OSM as the data provider, but the tiles as well as the bus locations are not freely licensed as far as I can tell. But I'm positive that we could get this screenshot under a suitable license (If we liked to feature this, I could ask).

-- Tyr (talk) 10:46, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for proposing!
I think the OSM attribution is a bit disrespectful since it is barely readable (since it is just text on the map) - instead the map companies are well readable (background). At first I did not see the ODbL link.
Why can't they host the jquery library themselves but instead leak their user data to "don't be evil" google ( … :-(
Otherwise: a nice application – similar to the french train thing. Could be featured if we have nothing better (and after it has a free license for the screenshot). However, we should only feature the French trains OR this one here as both are quite similar. Maybe with several months space between both.
If you write them an email … the answer should be from a person with the needed authority. --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 19:00, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Yes, the OSM attribution is a little bit hard to read. But it's still a beta, isn't it? Strangely, they apparently only want feedback to a very generic info@ mail address (which seems to be mainly a contact for tourists of the region!?).
Also, now I'm starting to think that it could be hard to get the screenshot under a really open licence because it features the official logos of the tourism region and other firms. Maybe something like CC-BY-SA-ND could work (would that be enough for IOTW?), or if we pixelated the respective logos…
-- Tyr (talk) 19:28, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
We (I) could simply edit out the logos, same grey colour as the background. But maybe these companies also will not like this because they want to be seen. ;-)
Oh, by the way, companies... the map is made by an external company, so possibly it still holds the needed copyrights for the map style (and not the Meran bus company). Could not that easy to get a license, but you can try it.
"ND" is not really "free" because you would not be allowed to edit anything. "The NC and ND options will make a work non-free according to the Definition of Free Cultural Works." (WP). It greatly reduces possible uses of such an image. So I would not like to have ND here. --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 22:34, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Well, if the image was CC-BY-SA (or similar), one could legally extract the logo(s) and create derivative works from it, for example for a logo of a competing tourism region (and I guess they wouldn't like that to happen). Or are such logos always protected by other laws (trade marks?!)? I'm not a lawyer unfortunately.
And yes, the company who makes the map is R3GIS (I have a contact who works there, so that should be less of a problem I hope).
-- Tyr (talk) 14:59, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
IANAL: Yes, usually trademark law applies too (and, AFAIK, the free CC licenses do not restrict the trademark rights). By the way: those are quite simple logos - just text - that may not be copyright eligible anyway (this depends strongly on the country … and the judge/court in the end). However, maybe a licensing a screeshot with removed logos would be the safe way if they agree. --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 15:13, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Not sure if we're saying "No" to this then? Old now anyway -- Harry Wood (talk) 17:49, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Baby Onsie for that future osm contibutor from

[2] [3]

User:Tripmapisart 21:48, 2 February 2015‎

Looks cute :-) The second one shows more of the map
The photo is labelled as (C) copyright all rights reserved on flickr there. Are you the photographer? You can set it as CC licensed on flickr or upload a copy of your photo to this wiki.
We need permission from the photographer, and I guess in this case we'd want to know that the photographer is also a parent giving permission for this photo to be shared widely as image of the week. Are you the kid's parent?
-- Harry Wood (talk) 01:12, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
No reply about that. Parking -- Harry Wood (talk) 12:29, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Osm Poi age of different cities


-- User:Baditaflorin 20:39, 6 October 2014‎

I like them! Which is your favourite city? I like the look of Moscow.
Also I assume you're willing share open licensed, since you're posting this suggestion here? Best thing is if you upload an actual image on the wiki with a license
-- Harry Wood (talk) 01:55, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Also the diary entry seems to be suffering from more and more broken images there now (see comments on there) Would be good if that could be fixed before featuring it -- Harry Wood (talk) 19:36, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
I'd still like to hear back from baditaflorin about that but... nothing so far -- Harry Wood (talk) 12:32, 6 November 2015 (UTC)


open source bicycle sharing using OSM: OpenSourceBikeShare or whitebikes

Possible but could do with an explanation.--Andrew (talk) 21:25, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure what image is being suggested here. No follow up from the proposer -- Harry Wood (talk) 01:20, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Parking this idea. Not sure what image was being proposed -- Harry Wood (talk) 21:56, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Using Sentinel2 images


Before and after using new Sentinel2 as an alternative to Landsat satellite images Sentinels Scientific Data Hub

-- User:Harrierco 14:09, 3 January 2016

Although the featured image is display at 400px wide on the wiki Main Page we prefer to have the image uploaded at a larger resolution (the wiki scales down the image automatically). In this case that seems quite important as I find myself squinting to understand what I'm looking at.
I don't really understand the image in general. This needs more explaining. Sentinel2 is an alternative imagery source available to us is it? Could we create a "Sentinel-2" wiki page explaining more about it (including licensing/permissions information) and that could then be linked from this caption.
-- Harry Wood (talk) 11:35, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Parking. no reply -- Harry Wood (talk) 22:33, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

OpenStreetMap in Cuba Conference

Photos CC licensed in

Between April 25 and 27, took place in Havana the first Intenational Free Software Conference (CubaConf) of Cuba. Many Latin American OSM contributors went to Cuba to give talks about OpenStreetMap and organize a workshop and a mapathon. Blog post Wille (talk)

Oh yeah I saw your diary entry about Cubaconf. Great photos again. So much South America! -- Harry Wood (talk) 08:52, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
This one is the OSMers right? Maybe the best one to take. Unfortunately you've got an NC restriction on that flickr pic -- Harry Wood (talk) 11:09, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

I'll park it here for the moment in case we're desperate one week, but this is a bit out-of-date now -- Harry Wood (talk) 14:32, 9 August 2016 (UTC)