Anomalous contributor behaviour

Creating this thread as a way for anyone to document mappers in India, whose edits might seem weird, or just straight up making crass edits (which may or may not be vandalism).

Starting off with a couple few myself:

  • sovereign_quocda and sovereign_linhktg. Both users:
    • Share the same “sovereign_” prefix
    • Have been making significant amount of contributions, so much so that both are in the top 5 mappers of India as of writing this on OSMstats (RIP @Vonter’s days of leading)
    • Primarily map on weekdays, indicating that they do it possibly as a part of their job(s)

I’d consider it organsing editing, which means the company behind these folks are not in line with the policy for the same. I’m trying to figure out who is the company behind this, and get in touch with them regarding this.

Are you sure you’re not just describing a DWG revert here :smile: ?

(pinging @trigpoint for :popcorn: )

5 Likes

Have you already tried contacting them directly? In any case, the imagery they’re using might offer a clue: https://map-api-new.sovereignsolutions.net/sovereign/v20240410/road/tamilnadu_2/{z}/{x}/{y}.png

EDIT: I tried the imagery. Looks like Google Maps…? :sweat_smile:

Unfortunately I suspect they are tracing Google Maps roads.

In this changeset they mapped these roads:

Imagery sources are the custom layer (Google Maps) and Esri World Imagery.

And these roads are not visible in Esri World Imagery (clouds). So…

Here instead they traced the Tamil Nadu/Kerala Google Maps’ boundary as an highway=unclassified…

As SE mentioned, when you look at Changeset: 167863565 | OpenStreetMap “DWG of undiscussed automated edits by shanmugamrs”, with a blue star against his user name to show Moderator, does sort of give that away! :grinning:

1 Like

I commented on Changeset: 169428545 | OpenStreetMap with inquiry about the actual imagery source and why they think it can be used.

1 Like

My apologies, let’s just skip the latter. :grimacing:

(Note to self: Caffeinate and dig a tad bit deeper before going after people just looking at their edit counts)

3 Likes

now send an email to DWG as they ignored it and continued mapping

From: Mateusz Konieczny
To: “data@openstreetmap.org- DWG data working group” data@openstreetmap.org
Subject: looks like paid editing with Google Maps imagery (sovereign_ mapper), ignores changeset comment and continues editing
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2025 15:42:13 +0200
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.2.0 (GTK 3.24.41; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169428545
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/anomalous-contributor-behaviour/133100/

commented 10 hours again

they added 1400+ objects in
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169440505 5 hours again

recorded as ticket 2025072510000214

1 Like

And I see that sovereign_quocda blocked by fortera_au | OpenStreetMap and sovereign_linhktg blocked by fortera_au | OpenStreetMap were applied.

1 Like

Alright, thanks a lot to both you and @fortera_au! Let’s hope it finally gets them to respond to my emails as well.

Today, we got…drum rolls :drum:

and this seems to be a pattern with editors from Ola, because something similar happened with another mapper who’s also from Ola, who removed the construction tag from a stretch of road literally a couple of days after I had tagged it, even though it wasn’t ready.

UPDATE: Here’s another one I dug up, also by nileshbarawkar

tl;dr: I hate Ola mappers the most after Meta now

I also now see that DWG revert was performed

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 169841222, 169841249, 169841240, 169841260, 169841200, 169841256, 169841237, 169841215, 169841214, 169841228, 169841245, 169841232 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: incompatible source

not sure is anything remaining to be done

1 Like

and this one I simply reverted (if it would be a repeated problem I would write to DWG, linking list of edits with changeset comments)

1 Like

I’m quite surprised that they (seem) to have entirely stopped their mapping operations instead of reaching out to the DWG.

Unfortunately, we see it fairly frequently! :cry:

It’s reasonably common for even long-established mappers to get a “0-hour block”, where they simply have to read our message (often simple things like “please respond to CCs” etc) before continuing to map, they read the message, then don’t map again :roll_eyes:

2 Likes

I had emailed both the DWG and to the given email in Ola’s organised editing page. Seems like the folks at Ola have been really cooperative, assuring to look into the matter.

Earlier today, a “Flap Slimy Outward” changed the name=* of the country’s relation to that in the Hindi script. The reason? (at least from the comment):

India prefers “Bharat” over “India” since it’s a transliteration of its Hindi name

I got no clue which “India” does this person come from, but it would cause a literal f*cking civil war in mine. Thankfully, arkarjun took care of it fast enough by reverting the changes, but still we can’t let this person off the hook. Had it been some editor based in India, it would’ve been an entirely different thing, but they don’t even live anywhere near the country. So idk, maybe the DWG could send a warning to them?

P.S: I already emailed about this, it’s ticket#2025082310000181

Quick correction: It seems like arkarjun’s edits didn’t revert the name=*, so I did it.

I’ve commented on the changeset already. DWG ticket “[Ticket#2025082310000181]”.

1 Like

Welp, seems like they’re trying to defend it.

Here’s where I got the idea that India (or Bharat) “prefers” Hindi over English:
From Wikipedia: “According to Part XVII of the Constitution of India, Hindi in the Devanagari script is the official language of the Union, along with English as an additional official language.”
Hindi is native to India, whole English is only used because that was the language of its former colonizers. It isn’t unheard of for countries to change its name from a colonial language to a native one, like Swaziland changing its name to eSwatini, or Turkey to Türkiye.

I simply don’t understand why are they trying to tell us how to represent ourselves. :confused: