Redaction :-(


I fully understand and accept why the decision was taken to change the licence, but wow, the redaction process has screwed with quite a few ways in my local area. :frowning:

Guess I’ll just have to pick my way through with Josm’s validator, and make a list of everything that needs re-surveying. :frowning: :frowning:


Actually, maybe it’s not so bad.

It turned out that that I just happened to be looking at the one area that has been a bit ruined. Shouldn’t take too long to re-survey it…



Yes, I guess, it will turn out that there are hotspots of destruction where one mapper who hasn’t agreed to the license change was most active, which is usually on a rather small portion of the map. It is really unfortunately and a bummer but very limited and will not effect the increasing quality of OSM for long (hopefully).

Thanks for helping fix this.

Did you now ?

There you can even switch to “badmap” layer where you can see most of the redacted elements, also in your special area.

Thanks a lot for that link. I always wondered what effect the license change would have on the map.

I just took a look at the “badmap” for my country, the Netherlands. At first glance the damage seems small, but when I zoom in I can see a lot of supermarkets appear. Does this mean that all these supermarkets are going to disappear from openstreetmap in the future? Many of these nodes have been edited multiple times by many users, including by myself. I don’t like the idea of all this hard work being thrown away :frowning:

You can select different map layers in the cleanmap (the “+” in the upper righ):

  • The standard mapnik map (including good and bad data)
  • The “Cleanmap” which consists of good data only
  • The “Badmap” with all the objects that will dissapear in the next days

The Badmap really contains a lot of supermarkts and pubs that will most likely be deleted: e.g. here in the middle of Amsterdam

Last chance to save data or wait a few days to recollect the data

Too late :frowning: The OSMF Redaction Account has started hitting the Netherlands. Though it looks like it doesn’t delete the nodes but only deletes the tags that were not added nor modified by those who accepted the new license.


I wonder what’s the best way to restore this. There must be hundreds of supermarkets in the Netherlands that are going to be stripped of their shop=supermarket and name=… tags.
It is not a redaction it is a tsunami.

Looks like Poland is hit hard by this guy’s refusal:

This is my old account where I made imports from
The redaction bot has list of my odbl-accept edits from this account, but they delete too much…
More here

The bot is stpping in Poland now.
The core team is looking for a solution for that problem:

So please wait before doing edits there.

How accurate is CLEANMAP?
Is the bad data shown in CLEANMAP really going to be removed from OSM?

Even the main highways,etc are affected.

*** I have just noticed that the data has already been cleaned!! A lot of mapping ahead now:(

Why redaction bot deleted my own - public domain - data? For example, here:,bot_point_superseded,bot_line_superseded_cp,bot_line_superseded,bot_point_modified,bot_line_modified_cp,bot_line_modified,bot_point_deleted,bot_line_deleted_cp,bot_line_deleted bot deleted a path with id=116617692.

Good question. Looks like a bug in the bot… :frowning:
Edit: Explanation in next post.

That path was made up of 2 nodes. One node was added by you, the other node has been redacted - presumably it was added by someone who hasn’t agreed to the contributor terms. It wouldn’t make much sense to just delete one node, and leave a one node way.

No, it’s not a bug. As far as I can reconstruct the situation, then the series of events in that particular example was as follows:

The way 116617692 (tagged highway=path) was created by leon_ti and had two nodes. One of these, 1314259521, was also created by leon_ti and does still exist. The other one, 952681039 had usm78-gis as the author, who has explicitly rejected the license.

The bot deleted the node by usm78-gis. As a result, the way had only one node left and was also deleted - because a valid way needs at least two nodes.

Okay, thank you for your explaination…