User talk:Ezekielf

Welcome to OpenStreetMap

Hello Ezekielf, and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

Here are some tips to help you make the most from OSM:

• Please don't use copyrighted maps as a data source for OpenStreetMap edits
• To meet other mappers from your country, add these lines to your wiki userpage:

  [[Category:Users in your country|Ezekielf]]

  [[Category:Users in your city|Ezekielf]]

• Join your regional mailing list
• Take a look at the Beginners' guide
• And if you have any questions, look at the FAQ page, or just ask!

Have fun mapping!

--EdoM (lets talk about it) 10:53, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Categories

Hi,
you are supposed to change "your country" and "your city" in the categories with the name of your country and your city :)
--EdoM (lets talk about it) 12:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Track

Hi, I saw your edit for highway=track https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:highway%3Dtrack&oldid=2225365 and while I might be wrong (not a native English speaker), I believe the comma between minor and land-access should be removed because the intention is “those land access roads that are minor”, and not “minor or land-access roads”.—Dieterdreist (talk) 20:21, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Even as a native English speaker I find the rules around comma placement rather tricky. I originally wrote the phrase as "minor land access roads" but recently realized the meaning is somewhat ambiguous. It could refer to “those land access roads that are minor”, or to “those access roads that lead to a minor land” (whatever a minor land is). Hyphenating land access makes it clearer that "minor" and "land-access" are both adjectives describing "roads", rather than "minor" describing "land" and "access" describing "roads". Multiple adjectives modifying a noun are typically comma separated. For example: "The large, beautiful, blue house". So "minor, land-access roads" seemed like the proper way to write the phrase. However, now that I've done some more reading up on commas placement rules I'm not so confident! It seems that adjectives should only be comma separated if they are coordinate, but the comma should left out if they are cumulative. https://prowritingaid.com/grammar/1008103/Should-I-use-a-comma-between-two-adjectives. These terms are new to me (or I'd forgotten them from high school English class), but I think in this case the adjectives "minor" and "land-access" are cumulative, meaning that you are correct and "minor land-access roads" is more proper than "minor, land-access roads". I'm not 100% positive though. This distinction between coordinate and cumulative adjectives seems a bit fuzzy to me. With or without the comma, the meaning is "minor and land-access roads", not "minor or land-access roads", but I think without the comma is more proper. -- Ezekielf (talk) 21:45, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

great. Agree, they’re cumulative. —Dieterdreist (talk) 00:18, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Missing file information

Hello! And thanks for your upload - but some extra info is necessary.

Sorry for bothering you about this, but it is important to know source of the uploaded files.

Are you the author of image File:124787243-5992ce80-df16-11eb-9809-ab731f25733d.png ?

Or is it copied from some other place (which one?)?

Please, add this info to the file page - something like "I took this photo" or "downloaded from -website link-" or "I took this screeshot of program XYZ".

Doing this would be already very useful.

Licensing - photos

In case that you are the author of the image: Would you agree to open licensing of this image, allowing its use by anyone (similarly to your OSM edits)?

In case where it is a photo you (except relatively rare cases) author can make it available under a specific free license.

Would you be OK with CC0 (it allows use without attribution or any other requirement)?

Or do you prefer to require attribution and some other things using CC-BY-SA-4.0?

If you are the author: Please add {{CC0-self}} to the file page to publish the image under CC0 license.

You can also use {{CC-BY-SA-4.0-self}} to publish under CC-BY-SA-4.0 license.

Once you add missing data - please remove {{Unknown|subcategory=uploader notified February 2022}} from the file page.

Licensing - other images

If it is not a photo situation gets a bit more complicated.

See Drafts/Media file license chart that may help.

note: if you took screenshot of program made by someone else, screenshot of OSM editor with aerial imagery: then licensing of that elements also matter and you are not a sole author.

note: If you downloaded image made by someone else then you are NOT the author.

Note that in cases where photo is a screenshot of some software interface: usually it is needed to handle also copyright of software itself.

Note that in cases where aerial imagery is present: also licensing of an aerial imagery matter.

Help

Feel free to ask for help if you need it - you can do it for example by asking on Talk:Wiki: new topic.

Please ask there if you are not sure what is the proper next step. Especially when you are uploading files that are not your own work or are derivative work (screenshots, composition of images, using aerial imagery etc).

If you are interested in wider discussion about handling licencing at OSM Wiki, see this thread.

--Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 22:34, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

I added an explanation of the source. Is it all set, or is something else needed? -- Ezekielf (talk) 00:48, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Use of fair use itself is a bit tricky, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Wiki#Designing_policy_for_handling_files_without_clear_license (in short: fair use in UK is far more strict and it is not actually decided whether we want to allow fair use or not, probably yes). But this will be good enough for now. I am planning to limit myself to hunting down copyright violations and really dubious cases, without touching fair use issues. And there is about 20 000 files without any copyright info, without even {{Unknown}} Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:56, 2 February 2022 (UTC)