Talk:Tag:man made=watermill

• I already used this tag for some watermills near Eindhoven (The Netherlands), so I agree with this tag (now have it quickly accepted and start showing them on the map please :-). --Freek 13:40, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

• Water mills usually have a specific man-made water feed from their main source and a run off back to the stream or whatever. They can be quite long, but they are not canals or streams. Is this worth a tag too? Chillly 14:39, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Near Eindhoven these feeds are mostly reservoirs that I model as part of the river/stream's natural=water polygon. Perhaps landuse=reservoir would be better there? Also, I mostly have a waterway=river linestring running down the middle, which would then be tagged in the way to-be-decided. Personally, I don't really care what kind of water it is... --Freek 12:06, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
  • I have remembered that the man-made canals that feed to and from a water mill is called a leat. Chillly 17:55, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

• What about ship mills? Are they a new category or only a class of water mills?

old site content

Status

Proposal

Proposed-by

Master

Proposed-date

2008-03-14

Voting

Because I think there are not much problems about this tag I'm starting the voting now.
The voting has started 10 May 2008 and ends 24 May 2008.

• I approve this proposal.--Master 15:10, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. Ivansanchez 15:27, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Eimai 15:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Tordanik 15:29, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Freek 15:33, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --DrMark 17:47, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Cartinus 21:23, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --SlowRider 21:25, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Franc 23:33, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Jesusfreak 09:05, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Smsm1 10:49, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --alastairj 11:34, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Pieren 16:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --EdoM (lets talk about it) 16:35, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Glangollor 10:26, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Rene A 17:14, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Phonon 19:23, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Voting has finished now. Tag is approved.

Is a bare water wheel a Watermill?

In my area, we have at least two historic sites where the water wheel is the only remaining feature. For example, this famous historic site in Idaho Springs: http://www.flickr.com/photos/wallyg/6203383991/ http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.73992&lon=-105.51661&zoom=17&layers=M

It was previously tagged as a point node, with the name "Water Wheel" but no useful feature type. I could not find a feature type for water wheel, so I temporarily tagged it (and another like it near Kittredge) as man_made=waterwheel. Since then, I discovered man_made=watermill, which I didn't notice before due to it not being the American vernacular.

My question is, is watermill proper for tagging a stand-along water wheel, where no other mill works remain? These would be historic or decorative structures, and it seems like watermill implies too much additional.

Also, I'd like to discuss rendering of these features if anyone is interested.