From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

You are using a ValueDescription template for a key description. What are the expected values for this key?

Would it not be better to have 'motorcycle' as the value for a more general theme key? --Polarbear w (talk) 20:09, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Didn't get the part with the template. Regarding the order of the namespace : I think it's easier to manage when the "main topic" is in front, similar to the contact philosophy, Tag:shop=bicycle#Additional_keys or Key:social_facility#Whom_is_served_by_the_facility. Also see Talk:Proposed_features/shop_subtags and Talk:Key:shop#Namespaces_for_shops. user:rtfm Rtfm (talk) 19:03, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

poor name

"Whether an accommodation / amenity is designated for motorcyclists," - so it is about a motorcycle theme or not? There may be amenity designated for motorcyclists that is not in motorcycle theme, there may be place in a motorcycle theme that is friendly to everybody, there may be even place in a motorcycle theme hostile to motorcyclists Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:03, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

It sounds like attempt to recreate horrible motorcycle_friendly tag under a new name Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:03, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
It's correct that there are "amenity for motorcyclists that is not in motorcycle theme", the "theme" tag is only for places which are especially for motorcyclists, will add some examples to the description to make this more clear. But how may an item which is for motorcyclists be "hostile" to them ? The term "theme" is meant like this : "A setting given to a restaurant, pub, or leisure venue, intended to evoke a particular country, historical period, culture, etc." user:rtfm Rtfm (talk) 19:03, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
There's already a theme tagging proposal that has been used for much longer then this, makes a lot more sense, and by going with it instead would mean there wouldn't have to be a million different iterations and pages for the millions of possible whatever:theme=whatever tagging combinations people could invent. This is unnecessarily complicates things and just tries to reinvent a wheel that doesn't need reinvent. Just use theme=motorcycle instead and call it a day. There's zero reason to use this tag instead of it. --Adamant1 (talk) 22:42, 18 December 2019 (UTC)


Tags used in OpenStreetMap need to have an objective, clear definition to be useful. This tag is not clear: is it for feature that refuse to provide services or accommodations to anyone who does not arrive by motorcycle? This seems unlikely. So, how does one determine if a place is motorcycle:theme=yes or motorcycle:theme=no? --Jeisenbe (talk) 09:02, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Very simple : If it's dedicated to motorcyclists. I don't think they will shoot anyone arriving without motorcycle. Check the examples on the page and then tell us again what you didn't understand. Do you also got a problem if a fish shop sells meat besides ? rtfm Rtfm (talk) 22:24, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
What does it mean to be "dedicated to motorcyclists"? Is there a plaque or sign that says "this shop is dedicated to motorcyclists"? What about if there are lots of motorcycles used in the decor, or the word "motorcycle" in the name, yet there is no motorcycle parking and motorcycle clubs do not visit? --Jeisenbe (talk) 01:12, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
Seems you still didn't have a look at the examples yet ?. This seems to me a useless attempt to sabotage this tag, but not to make it more "verifiable". rtfm Rtfm (talk) 12:44, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Namespaces in general

There's one single guy doing everything against namespaces, including mass editing of already established tags to something less readable what he probably considers more "traditional" tagging. The behaviour is very similar to religious bigots as there are no comprehensible reasons behind this. Especially if one has a look at the number already established namespaces. Therefore I call that sabotage rtfm Rtfm (talk) 11:27, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Please stop insulting others. Please cease insults or cease any activity in OpenStreeMap including editing OSM Wiki. Also, one more general tip: if you insult specific person at least clarify who is attacked. I am not even sure whatever it is directed toward me or someone else. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 13:43, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
And note that even if one ignores insults then remains of your comment are without anything specific, unclear and not actionable Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 13:45, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Likely he's referring to me and our recent thing over him trying to redirect clothes=motorcycle to motorcycle:clothes as petty payback for the request that SMB overview be moved to his user space and redirected. Of course because I think that tagging clothing stores with the clothes tag, which is de facto and has almost 40,000 uses is religious bigotry and caused by a hate of namespaces. Which has no "comprehensible reason." For some reason to him it's not comprehensible that someone would go with that tag instead of one that has less then 2% of the uses and zero support anywhere motorcycle:clothes. That's just the way his brain seems to work though. He also ignores all the name spaces I do use on a daily basis. Addr:housenumber just to name one, but there many others. I just don't use "his" namespaces and really only when there's another tag that is another tag for the same thing that has 4000 times more uses then what he is recommending. Or in cases where the tag he thinks everyone is an anti-namespace bigot for not using has been mass edited (or should I say sabotaged?) by him in the past. Outside of that, I could really give a crap about "namespaces" and I use them all the time. Including a few he has came up with that make sense , aren't convoluted as hell, and don't have already existing better alternatives. Dare I say though that his constant personal attacks and the repeated ignoring of evidence is the real religious bigotry here if there is any. Obviously, Rtfm is bigoted toward anyone that doesn't do exactly what he wants and exactly how he wants it. It's always projection with him though and nothing the other side does is good enough. Just like his comments that things should be discussed while at the same time going off about how there is to much discussion. He demagogues and plays both sides and then insults you no matter what you do that's not just goose stepping to his commands. That's all I have to say about it. 10 bucks he continues doing it and saying I just hate all namespaces and are trying to sabotage them even though I use them all the time. Even "his" sometimes. Religious bigotry and demagoguery indeed. --Adamant1 (talk) 18:53, 11 September 2020 (UTC)