Major problems with Amazon edits

After months of discussion in changeset comments about the task Added Directions, see e.g. OpenStreetMap (OSM) Changeset Discussions and OpenStreetMap (OSM) Changeset Discussions among other, Amazon still uses “fishbone” shapes of parking lots as lonely justification to add oneway=yes.
In the comments of e.g. Changeset: 129308457 | OpenStreetMap I asked about describing the tasks on their project page, Organised Editing/Activities/Amazon - OpenStreetMap Wiki, and to publish the instructions in order to correct them but both was refused.

Now, I find more problem with the task Modified road into Dual Carriageway, neither documented, as tags like sidewalk=both, cycleway:both=lane and turn:lanes plus all other :lanes are not properly adjusted. Additionally, many route relations like route=road and PTv1 and PTv2 relations are damaged. At least the needed adjustments of tags have been reported by several users to several employees without changes in workflow, see e.g. OpenStreetMap (OSM) Changeset Discussions.

I expect better changeset from paid mappers and I am tired to review Amazon’s changeset as at least with relations they seem not to have a single mapper who has the knowledge to fix the problems, see Changeset: 132036902 | OpenStreetMap. Therefore I would request to stop any edits where they do not fully understand the present object’s tag and the concept of the underlying relations.


have you tried emailing them?

from my understanding, that’s what you’re expected to do with organized editors. (the, “let me speak to your manager” of OSM)


Actually, I’ve always thought that the rules that applied to “normal” mappers apply to “organised” ones too.

If you don’t get a satisfactory reply via changeset comments, try emailing the DWG. We can send a message to the user that they have to read before continuing to edit.

In-company escalation emails are great, but they’re in addition to, not instead of, normal good practice.


My understanding is that it is the job of the employees to escalate the problems themselves plus I refrain to use even more channels, especially private ones, in favor of better transparency.
By the way @deepikja, deepikja, was already involved in some of the CSs discussions, see OpenStreetMap (OSM) Changeset Discussions. Additionally, I have just written a OSM PM to the user with invitation to this topic. Let’s see if and when I’ll get an answer.


Actually, my last communications with the DWG were rather disappointing and in my mind these discussions should not take place behind the curtain.

But well, especially Amazon, seems to need a lots of pressure to only move ½ a step. So I might give it another try and:

  • report @anilkgba for not answering to CSs comments and continuing editing without fixing previouly made errors in advance.
  • report @nagalvad for an improper profile without a link to the project (which I did already without an answer from DWG)
    • report Amazon for not checking that the profiles of their employees meet all requirements.
  • report Amazon as their tasks miss documentation on the wiki.
  • report Amazon for not supplying proper (missing, incomplete or wrong) sources in changesets in many cases. A imagery_used is not enough.
  • report Amazon as their review system obviously fails and lacks documentation
  • report Amazon as replies to individually written changesets comments created from predefined text blocks are obviously impolite and most of the times do not answer any questions

So would I have to ask to block any changeset of Amazon until the task are documented, the review system works and all previously made errors are fixed?


For the fishbone problem: Amazon promised to not use “fishbone” parking for adding oneway roads any more 22 days ago (Changeset: 134560570 | OpenStreetMap). (I haven’t checked their recent edits though)

At least Amazon actually use the data and should have an interest in (eventually) getting it right.

The worst examples of “mapping” by paid contributors are from those who will never be affected by their mistakes and give every impression that they neither know nor care what they are doing. The incomplete conflation of Transport for London’s Cycling Infrastructure Database would be a good case study of how not to do it.


1 Like



I’ve escalated to both of the listed contacts with a complaint of “I miss the documentation of all the individual task and the review system on the wiki page. In addition, the currently used review system does not work or how do the explain that many missed errors. E.g. they need to review their review system and come up with a better working solution.” (which was copied and pasted from the complaint emailed to the DWG).

I note that says that “The team maintains a 48hr SLA on working day” so we’ll expect a reply by the middle of next week.


Hi Skyper,

Thank you for sharing your inputs. Amazon maps team values OSM community members’ inputs a lot and we try to maintain the highest standard while sharing our edits back on OSM. The intent is always to enrich the OSM. We follow our internal Standard operating procedures (SOP) which we keep revising while making edits. We ensure we adhere to the guidelines mentioned in the OSM wiki pages. On occasions members of our team go on leave or leave organization which sometimes limit ability to respond to comments on changesets. However, any email to is addressed by us in 2 working days. We humbly request you to please reach out on this email id in case of any issue that you encounter.
In regards to edits which you are referencing, we will go back and look into them and incorporate the learnings in our own SOPs. We will get back to you by 5/5 as we are public leave till mid next week.

Again, we thank you for helping us maintain high standards with our edits for OSM.


For the avoidance of doubt, that was the other address that I emailed before I posted

I’d like to stay with Amazon and to discuss other badly designed edits or imports in separate topics.
Though, talking about Amazon, I would be heavily, positively surprised if they use tags like sidewalk=both or cycleway:both=lanes and I doubt that they use any kind of type=route relations and for sure no bus routes.
Talking about the knowledge and care I am hesitated as the problems have been mentioned multiple times before hand in changeset discussions but the instructions were either not properly adjusted or not read and understood. Speaking about relations, I fear there is a big lack of knowledge as the relations were not fixed by any employee.

I do not know exactly how tagging in the US works but at least “across the big lake” I find changesets with “fishbone” in the comment, e.g. Changeset: 135558643 | OpenStreetMap.

Once again, half a step forward as the text is now in place but the link is still missing.

Hi deepikja,
welcome to the forum and enjoy your off days.

Please, do not waste our time as I am only talking about active mappers not responding to changeset discussions and to OSM mails. For former employees your external email address might work, though, I would prefer your OSM account or a different OSM account over an external email address in order to stay in our nice ecosystem.
By the way, your list of mappers needs an update as some active mappers are missing.

Regarding the commented changeset, sure, go ahead and take a look and ask questions if needed. But please, do not forget to take a look at all other (so far not commented) changesets of the same task which might show similar problems. To regain trust into your review system commenting on each changeset either marking it as good changeset or describing the problems would be a solution. I would be happy about some numbers regarding the total amount of reviewed changesets and the number of changesets with problems.

Overall, it would be nice, if you could share a time line regarding your reviews, the actual fixes of the bad changesets and last but not least for the documentation of each task on your wiki page. Thanks a lot in advance.

1 Like

Just to follow this one up, anilkgba still hasn’t replied to questions, hence

1 Like

And to follow this one up, nagalvad has updated their profile, although still not quite in line with what the OEG requires, hence Please note that this user has replied to questions they were asked.

1 Like

For info, the DWG got an email update on 28/4/2023 that was essentially the same as the one above, but haven’t heard anything since.

Hi Skyper,

Thank you for your time and we appreciate you sharing your valuable insights. We have updated the list of Amazon editors and reviewers who are actively editing on OSM, and we will continue to update the list as we add additional editors and reviewers to our team.

When making changes to OSM, we adhere to the guidelines listed in the wiki. Based on OSM’s suggested practices and standards procedures, we update our internal SOPs to assist us comply with the community regulations. Going forward, we’ll keenly monitor that the SOPs on our internal wiki is consistently updated, reviewed and is compliant with the contents on OSM. We will take initiatives to adhere to the linked sites and refrain from making any additions or modifications if we are unsure of the ground reality due to lack of latest resources or information.

We have re-verified the changesets in which directions were added with fish bone parking as the sole evidence. The guidelines for addition of directions in presence of the fish bone parking aisles were followed based on the content present on OSM wiki Key:direction - OpenStreetMap Wiki (Please refer: Parking direction for street parking). However, from now on we will add directions only in presence of lane markings and street signage.

To make sure that the existing attributes such as sidewalks, turn lanes, bicycle lanes, traffic signs and bus routes/relations on the segments are correctly adjusted, we will work on documenting a detailed SOP on how to use the JOSM tool to convert roads into dual carriageways as per the ground truth. We will halt the dual carriage way modifications until the team has received training and is fully informed about how to use JOSM and the tagging involved.

We will actively monitor and respond to queries received on both emails and changeset comments within 48 business hours as mentioned on the wiki. We will adhere to the OSM guidelines and take preventative efforts to make sure that errors (if any) are instantly caught by the internal quality team if they are flown into OSM.



1 Like

48 business hours is 6 workdays or am I misreading? Without response, on the 7th calendar day…