Template talk:OSM

I think it is not a good idea to link to instable ID-numbers. If somebody separate a way he produce automatical a new ID. Let's find a way to key-value-pair and a bbox. --Kolossos (talk) 17:43, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Why?

What's the point of having this template, when there is the coordinates template (with a link to OSM)? - HyperGaruda (talk) 17:48, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Actually, I see some use in this when linking to lines and areas, but the node/point part still seems a bit useless. - HyperGaruda (talk) 17:07, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

The en.wiki linking is somewhat sub-optimal; on de.wiki it works a lot better; eg. click the icon in the top-left of de:Dossenheim (example of area) or de:Oberrheinische Eisenbahn (example of linear route) and the potential of the smooth integration is hopefully more apparent. —Sladen (talk) 19:42, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Oh wow, that's pretty neat actually. Too bad the current usage at en-wiki looks more like a spam link. Isn't it possible to emulate the Germans with a plain symbol in the title area? - HyperGaruda (talk) 08:05, 27 September 2015 (UTC)