piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
gileri (2022-01-02 14:24:55+00:00): Bonjour et bonne année !

J'ai annulé la modification : https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/115671772

Il s'agit du nom de l'échangeur, et pas de la destination.

De plus, osmose n'est pas une source en lui-même, il est préférable d'indiquer la source primaire utilisée par Osmose si elle existe.
A67-A67 (2021-11-22 16:55:07+00:00): Het Polderpad is langer dan alleen dit wegsegment. De Wikidata-tag zou aan alle ways tussen de Buitenwatersloot en de Van der Dussenweg moeten worden toegevoegd.
EP_Repair (2021-12-16 07:40:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114990646 where the changeset comment is: revert damaging, unconventional, and fictious golf course edits as per Ticket#2021121310000109 at Baker Park
wkdgs (2021-11-22 11:06:35+00:00): HI,

hab den Weg entfernt.

Im ID-Editor musst du einfach auf das Objekt klicken und dann per Entfernen-Taste oder das Mülltonnensymbol im Kontextmenü (Rechtsklick) löschen. Wichtig ist dabei, dass das gesamte Objekt zu sehen ist.

Gruß
winkeldings
derWolle (2021-11-22 11:19:09+00:00): Hi, danke dir, nächstes Mal weiß ich Bescheid :). Beste Grüße!
BCNorwich (2021-11-22 09:54:42+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

You've got both houses as number 2. 

Appleby Green, (capital letters to both words), is the street name not the house name. 2 appleby green isn't the name either.

The address:city= would be Romford.

Please see here:- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr   for further information.

Need any help with corrections please just ask.

Regards Bernard.
redd (2021-11-26 20:01:16+00:00): Hallo ChrisBommel, herzlich willkommen bei OpenStreetMap. Bitte bei Änderungen in Zukunft einen Änderungskommentar eingeben.
vielen dank! frohes mapping! redd
wolfbert (2025-05-17 11:16:30+00:00): Hallo, gilt die 50er-Beschränkung bei https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/121499537 ff. noch? Falls ja, müsste die Beschränkung angepasst werden, siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Conditional_restrictions#Vehicle_dimension (z.B. weight> o.ä., je nach Zeichen)
gzin (2025-05-17 12:39:24+00:00): Hallo!
Ob es noch gilt, weiß ich nicht.
Diese Änderung basierte auf meinem Mapillary-Bild vom 07.08.2021 https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=846707639574167&focus=photo

Bei meinem etwas neueren Foto (06.08.2022) war es in diese Richtung auf jeden Fall noch vorhanden: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=410632527803862&focus=photo

Ob es immer noch so ist, weiß ich nicht. Ob es in die andere Richtung auch gilt, kann ich ebenfalls nicht sagen. Ich komme auf jeden Fall nicht allzu häufig an dieser Stelle vorbei.

Bist du aus dieser Gegend?

LG
Günther
gzin (2025-05-17 12:45:10+00:00): Ich habe versucht, den Syntax-Fehler auszubessern. Besser so?
wolfbert (2025-05-18 15:11:07+00:00): Hallo Günther, nein, bin nicht aus der Gegend, ist mir nur aufgefallen. Danke für die Änderung.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-15 17:54:08+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/859746855/history has roof = hipped that was added in this edit
Maybe roof:shape=hipped was intended here?

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roof:shape and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roof
EBSerKartler (2025-06-09 16:32:37+00:00): Hello Mateusz,
thank you for your feedback! I have just fixed this issue.
EP_Repair (2021-12-16 07:39:44+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114990646 where the changeset comment is: revert damaging, unconventional, and fictious golf course edits as per Ticket#2021121310000109 at Baker Park
EP_Repair (2021-12-16 07:40:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114990646 where the changeset comment is: revert damaging, unconventional, and fictious golf course edits as per Ticket#2021121310000109 at Baker Park
ivanbranco (2023-06-23 11:28:22+00:00): Hi lizzyd710,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7120251392

are you sure this is a memorial? it seems like a "touristi" arch to me

if it's a memorial, do you know what it commemorates?

thanks
wille (2021-11-26 12:21:14+00:00): oi, Severin! Ficou faltando deletar algumas tags nos pois modificados.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114075775
SeverinGeo (2021-11-26 12:26:54+00:00): Ah sim para Pague Menos e Puro
SeverinGeo (2021-11-26 12:28:59+00:00): Feito
EP_Repair (2021-12-16 07:40:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114990646 where the changeset comment is: revert damaging, unconventional, and fictious golf course edits as per Ticket#2021121310000109 at Baker Park
Glassman (2021-11-22 23:36:22+00:00): #TIP: if Northwest 30th Avenue is undergoing construction you can show it by tagging it as highway=construction + highway=residential - assuming it will be a residential street when the development opens.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114076111
artxx1 (2021-12-07 18:20:06+00:00): Hej, wygląda, że po tej poprawce Park jest półotwarty i nie wyświetla się poprawnie. Czy jesteś w stanie to skorygować?
lasica1982 (2021-12-08 00:38:45+00:00): Poprawione
artxx1 (2021-12-08 11:00:20+00:00): Super, dzięki!
Warin61 (2022-04-16 23:55:33+00:00): Hi,

What is an atlas check? 

I would not think a buss stop has an address?
tastrax (2022-09-11 05:35:47+00:00): Atlas checks come from MapRoulette and unfortunately MetroTasmania seems to have abbreviated street names when they imported (maybe) all the bus stops. There are literally hundreds of these errors across the state that I hope they fix. https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/19130
impiaaa (2021-11-22 20:03:20+00:00): Do not reuse nodes from unrelated objects.
Carnildo (2021-11-22 22:04:46+00:00): I think this needs to be reverted.  At least one of the Mica Peak trails you added doesn't exist, and I've got my doubts about a second one.
jellyturtle (2021-11-22 22:40:26+00:00): Thanks, can you be more specific about the trails on Mica Peak in question? The long one from the top of Quinnamose Cr west to Seltese Cr is very well travelled according to the Strava heatmap and visible from several satellite views, probably a trail on an old logging road. The small one at the west terminus of that trail is visible as a wide dirt road on the satellite imagery but not travelled (more of a turn around).
Carnildo (2021-11-23 03:04:43+00:00): The upper trail network was completely re-worked in the past year, so some of the Strava heatmap tracks are stale (I think Strava uses a three-year history).

When I was surveying the area a month ago, I ran out of daylight before being able to check more than the junction between the Quinnamose-Saltese segment and the California Creek and Moonshine trails, but I think your routing is mostly accurate.  However, when you deleted the stub trail I'd added, you discarded the surface information and access restrictions (and I think the access restrictions are different for the Mica Peak and Liberty Lake segments).

The small trail segment you added near the west end of the Quinnamose-Saltese segment (way 1005076838) was heavily overgrown with brush, and I suspect one of the tracks you extended (way 432963144) is similar.
jellyturtle (2021-12-04 21:03:49+00:00): Thanks for all the feedback, and my apologies for missing that you had added tags to those stubs! I'll look for those in the future. Using the changeset viewer I added back in all the access tags from ways I had deleted. I deleted that turnaround I added since it seems not to be used. For the two brushy trails I added a trail_visibility tag. New changeset is 114566210. BTW the Strava heatmap is now updated monthly and has only data from the last year - so more up-to-date than it used to be, but obviously doesn't tell you much about what's on the ground.
mueschel (2021-11-24 15:14:07+00:00): Hallo,
es ist nicht nötig, alle möglichen Tags für den gleichen Wert zu vergeben. 
"species" und "species:wikidata" (evtl noch species:de und species:it) sind völlig ausreichend. OSM ist kein botanisches Lexikon.

Alle anderen Einzelheiten kann der Nutzer der Daten einfach über wikidata erfahren.

  species = Platycladus orientalis
  species:de = Morgenländische Lebensbaum
  species:en = Chinese thuja;Oriental arborvitae;Chinese arborvitae;biota;Oriental thuja
  species:it = tuia orientale
  species:wikidata = Q33482
  taxon = Platycladus orientalis
  taxon:species = Platycladus orientalis
  taxonomy = Platycladus orientalis
MaximusIT (2021-11-28 13:51:25+00:00): Ja, ich weis, ich hab momentan mal zuviel daten drinnen (besser als zu wenig) aber werde mich nach nochmaligem studium des wikis auf species (mit sprachen) und taxon (mit sprachen) beschränken (Siehe Baum import in Wien). Taxonomy war noch ein Fehl-Tag den ich aus den GIS Daten hatte. Noch eine Frage, falls es jemand weis: In den GIS Daten ist ein "ort" bzw. "locatlità" angegeben, zusammen mit der nummer gibt das einen primary key. Momentan hab ich den wert in note bzw. description eingegeben und erst letzthin unter addr:street, es fühlt sich aber irgendwie nicht richtig an.
mueschel (2021-11-28 14:09:29+00:00): addr:* wird nur für echte Post-Adressen verwendet. Zur Lokalisierung von Objekten ist "object:street" in Verwendung, wenn auch nicht formal akzeptiert.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:object
Lee Carré (2021-11-23 01:55:01+00:00): Smaller changeset areas, please: http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
InfosReseaux (2021-11-23 10:21:21+00:00): This is data quality management changeset, moving country specific tagging to reviewed one.
Although I agree and try to refrain myself to make large changesets when contributing, such a changeset worth to be known by people monitoring one specific area within covered country.
We'd better helping each other on such topics. Those nudges could at least ask for particular context to understand what it's all about.
It feels like gendy54 pay respect to the rule's goal here.
Lee Carré (2021-11-26 22:03:08+00:00): If it were only covering a single county, I probably wouldn't be aware of it. But it spans multiple.

My request, besides being good practise, is because many large changesets appear in the local list for my area (which has few contributors). There are more jumbo changesets (that make 0 local changes) than there are local ones.
InfosReseaux (2021-11-27 19:15:15+00:00): It sounds to be a real problem, which won't be completely solved by observing the small changeset encouragement.

If you are monitoring these changes with OsmCha, let them know how this issue occurs and ask them to check with country limits instead of bbox which can overlap different countries even with small areas.

This is valid for many places in the world, because using bbox is not appropriate.
Lee Carré (2021-11-28 10:17:33+00:00): Nor will it be completely solved with tools (at least one developer has stated that there's currently no workable solution for this commonly suggested remedy).

There are open tickets re OSMCha.

Until magic is implemented, then the only mitigation is to keep changeset bbox small (as is best practice anyway).

One of the problems with filtering out large bboxes is that it also excludes the ones which do make local changes.

Ultimately, more granular filtering requires more processing (by a third-party).

Not really any different to claiming that the solution to spam is better filtering; that only addresses the symptom, not the cause.
Carnildo (2021-11-22 21:56:19+00:00): Are you sure about those trails you added?  Only one of them corresponds to a junction I noted in an on-the-ground survey.
jellyturtle (2021-11-22 22:50:33+00:00): These were all just inferred from the Strava heatmap so I deleted four of them that were less well travelled/distinct in favor of confirming them on the ground. The others look very well travelled.
SomeoneElse (2021-11-21 23:49:58+00:00): This node was originally added 9 years ago from Google Maps.  I've deleted it.
EP_Repair (2021-12-16 07:40:22+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114990646 where the changeset comment is: revert damaging, unconventional, and fictious golf course edits as per Ticket#2021121310000109 at Baker Park
BEDWARDS2021 (2021-11-22 00:24:40+00:00): Checked and the name is correct 'Mornington Peninsula Freeway'
BEDWARDS2021 (2021-11-22 00:24:12+00:00): Checked and the name is correct 'Mornington Peninsula Freeway'
joel56dt (2021-11-22 20:04:37+00:00): You tagged a number of businesses as banks, is this right?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9273390214
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9273390215
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9273390175#map=19/49.08404/-121.97875
Alan Trick (2023-11-22 17:29:13+00:00): Probably not. They also marked a section of the TCT as being a bridge, which it's not I don't think there's even a bridge where the water crossing is.
marczoutendijk (2021-11-22 09:40:56+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114089675 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert of vandalism of street names
marczoutendijk (2021-11-22 09:40:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114089675 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert of vandalism of street names
nevw (2021-11-22 05:26:15+00:00): Hi
what you have done is clearly wrong. Don't put incorrect information on the map.
user_5239402 (2021-11-22 04:15:54+00:00): 추가: 2020년 옥구선의 기점이 군산옥산신호장으로 변경되며 사실상 철도 기능을 잃은 상태이고 2020년 12월 군산항선의 개통으로 옥구선과의 접속 기능도 군산항선으로 이관되면서 군산화물선의 존재 이유가 사라졌습니다.
marczoutendijk (2021-11-22 09:41:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114089675 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert of vandalism of street names
Colin Smale (2021-12-22 12:06:43+00:00): Hi... Can you explain the source of this boundary? It doesn't look like it is a real administrative boundary (a council area). It also looks too broad to be the real town of St Helens. What was your frame of reference?
patelmm79 (2021-12-25 20:18:38+00:00): Hello, I will make additional amendments to correct.  I was trying to differentiate the boundaries of the borough of st helens (already exists, 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Borough_of_St_Helens ) and the town of st helens (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Helens,_Merseyside) , whose current OSM entry does not sufficiently differentiate with the surrounding villages.  I will correct.
Colin Smale (2021-12-27 14:45:19+00:00): Hi, thanks for responding. I have taken the admin tagging off of your new St Helens boundary as it does not correspond to any (local) government entity. I see you have now tagged the source as "Ordnance Survey" - exactly which OS dataset did you use for the geometry (not just the existence) of this boundary? Is it possible that it is an electoral boundary?
patelmm79 (2021-12-27 18:26:38+00:00): Hello, I sourced from this OS data source.  Officially, it is a "district ward"
https://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/doc/7000000000042418.

My interpretation here is that a district or borough (in this case,  district of st helens  (https://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/doc/7000000000006000)  is subdivided entirely into a combination of "district wards" and "civil parishes" you will see the list on that page.  The "district ward" and "civil parish" are at the same level of division The wards and civil parishes comprise the 16 "electoral wards" of St Helens .
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Borough_of_St_Helens).
Colin Smale (2021-12-27 18:48:47+00:00): District wards and civil parishes are connected only by coincidence. A ward is basically for convenience at election times (and are tagged as boundary=political), whereas a civil parish often has its own local council.

You seem not to be based in the UK, judging by the timestamps on youw work. I suggest you abstain from making changes to UK boundaries until you understand the system a bit better, lest you start to annoy people.
patelmm79 (2021-12-27 20:16:32+00:00): Hi Colin, I lived in UK for several years , and admittedly while I don't understand the administrative and electoral boundary system to the granularity that you might (which probably puts in the same category as most people in the UK), I'm trying my best here to translate available information into tangible improvements to the data on OSM, which does not seem complete with regards to the relationship between boroughs/ districts & the sub-units incorporated within. 

In this specific case, I'm trying to differentiate the entities of St Helens  borough (preexisting) and St Helens the town which is within the borough.  What is your guidance on how to do so?
patelmm79 (2021-12-27 20:25:43+00:00): Hi Colin, if you have any additional documentation that I can refer to regarding how the UK boundaries are implemented within OSM I'm happy to follow; I'm relying on this but it seems incomplete:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative#10_admin_level_values_for_specific_countries
Colin Smale (2021-12-27 21:36:49+00:00): Well, let's start with the fact that the admin boundaries in the UK are pretty much complete and correct. I maintain them personally. That's not to say there are no mistakes out there, but there aren't going to be many. If you see something you think is wrong I would be happy to investigate/advise specific cases.
Next thing is that, unlike many countries, the boundaries of administrative entities bear no deliberate resemblance to either electoral subdivisions, nor addresses, nor settlements. In general, named settlements don't have defined boundaries; there are huge areas which are not clearly in a single settlement - they may be "no-man's land" or it may be conjectural. St Helens is a good example; there is no documented boundary of an area called "St Helens" except the Borough (which contains large rural areas outside the town) and the parliamentary constituency which is a different game entirely. There is no town council, and there is no official boundary of the town (as a "settlement"). You cannot draw a line around the town and say that one side is categorically "in" St Helens and the other side is not. The fact that it would make sense if such an area would exist (looking at adjoining boundaries etc) does not mean that it does exist (remembering the OSM rule - one object IRL means one object in OSM).
Colin Smale (2021-12-27 21:37:49+00:00): Regarding admin boundaries, you might find this interesting: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Csmale/ukboundaries
patelmm79 (2021-12-27 21:50:55+00:00): Thanks for the additional information.  So in this case, would it be more appropriate to place a Node representing the location of the town of st helens instead of a relation/ boundary?
Colin Smale (2021-12-27 22:14:55+00:00): I would say so. That is the way it is normally done in the UK, especially where the exact boundary cannot be determined. Such a node already exists, though.... https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/26703040
patelmm79 (2021-12-27 22:22:35+00:00): Ok great, I'll follow this pattern going forward, and will make sure I revert the boundary that I added.  Apologies if I altered your hard work, you've  clearly put a lot of love into this.
Lofenyy (2021-12-23 01:55:18+00:00): 😂
marczoutendijk (2021-11-22 09:40:54+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114089675 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert of vandalism of street names
marczoutendijk (2021-11-22 09:41:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114089675 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert of vandalism of street names
EP_Repair (2021-12-16 07:40:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114990646 where the changeset comment is: revert damaging, unconventional, and fictious golf course edits as per Ticket#2021121310000109 at Baker Park
DaveF (2023-01-08 17:10:20+00:00): That's not a town. Please remove that tag.
Colin Smale (2021-11-23 08:32:02+00:00): Hi... What "town" is your new boundary supposed to represent? https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13466955#map=13/53.4512/-2.6779
Trevor_1 (2021-12-19 18:50:36+00:00): Hi Charlie, I hope you're doing well. You've done a lot of good work, I'm impressed. But I don't think OpenStreetMap wants the comma in the population field, because it shows up as an error here: http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=places&lon=-88.42940&lat=18.25887&zoom=11&overlays=megacities,largecities,cities,towns,villages,hamlets,islands,suburbs,neighbourhoods,farms,isolated_dwelling,localities,municipalities,errors_unknown_place_type,errors_population_format,errors_place_without_name,errors_pop_type_mismatch,population
Colin Smale (2021-11-23 15:55:59+00:00): Where did you get this "border" from?
impiaaa (2021-11-22 20:02:47+00:00): Thanks for your contributions. Some notes. First of all, please use a descriptive changeset comment. See here for more information: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments . Second, the "name" tag should only contain the actual name of a feature. See here for more information: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_use_name_tag_to_describe_things Things like the species of a tree would better go under "species" (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:species), and the tag number under "ref" (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ref). If you really can't find a good tag to describe an object, you can use "description".
Alex_the_Hum (2021-11-22 20:08:51+00:00): appreciate your suggestions - will try to clean it up accordingly
marczoutendijk (2021-11-22 09:40:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114089675 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert of vandalism of street names
marczoutendijk (2021-11-22 09:40:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114089675 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert of vandalism of street names
WoodWoseWulf (2021-11-22 23:23:34+00:00): Hi BirdMan3,
Is there a reason you moved a lot of the tagging for Stonehouse Wood Sanctuary from the area to a node?
marczoutendijk (2021-11-22 09:41:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114089675 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert of vandalism of street names
marczoutendijk (2021-11-22 09:40:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114089675 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert of vandalism of street names
Tavlor (2021-11-23 18:13:06+00:00): It's unclear to me why OSMCha flagged this; I used the "Extract" tool in iD on this building.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114079473
vulasala (2021-11-23 09:50:31+00:00): Hi KaushiP,
Trust you are doing well. I have fixed the validation errors at way 723166412 and way 723166395.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114079686
marczoutendijk (2021-11-22 09:40:52+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114089675 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert of vandalism of street names
marczoutendijk (2021-11-22 11:10:48+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5464
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:02:06+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:02:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:00:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.