piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Constable (2019-07-05 14:59:41+00:00): Hi Tania, if you add a building tag to a area (just like you did here https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/699357836 and here https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/699357837) it means that the whole area is a building, which is definitely not correct here. The two areas you have been drawing are not buildings, they do contain buildings, but also a parking lot, few service roads, a swimming pool,...
Also, the same error (on a smaller scale) was already been done by the mapper adding this one https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/332545657 and the other hotel just north-east.
Now, having two oversized buildings one within the other is twice wrong.
Could you please remove those two areas you added and improve the already mapped hotel building shape?
thanks
habi (2019-06-24 11:17:44+00:00): This doesn't really look like a park on the aerial imagery. Do you try to spawn some Pokemons here?
Linfection (2019-06-24 11:33:12+00:00): Pokemon ? ? ? what ?
habi (2019-06-24 14:29:58+00:00): It has been known that 'Pokemon Go' players edit the map to influence the game: https://www.reddit.com/r/openstreetmap/comments/5q4ctl/warning_players_of_pok%C3%A9mon_go_may_be_editing_osm/

I thought this might be the case here, since several of your recent edits are parks where there is no park visible in the aerial imagery.
What is the reason to add a park outline  here?
habi (2019-06-24 11:19:50+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/699356889 definitely doesn't look like a park on the aerial imagery, more like a parking lot or some industrial area. Can you give a source for it being a park?
maraf24 (2019-06-24 19:15:50+00:00): Przystanek nazywa się Hubska, a nie Hubska (Dawida).
maraf24 (2019-06-24 19:22:40+00:00): Opis zestawu to chyba: "zmapowanie szczegółów ulicy Hubskiej i Suchej po zakończeniu remontu"?
maraf24 (2019-06-24 19:23:58+00:00): Brakuje wjazdu dla rowerów na chodnik dla skręcających w lewo pod wiadukt z Suchej - jest tam obniżony krawężnik.
maraf24 (2019-06-24 19:27:04+00:00): Nb. w sobotę światła na Hubskiej/Glianianej działały, więc może teraz są już na stałe.
Paweł Bogubowicz (2019-06-25 08:36:11+00:00): Ad. 1 Odpowiedz w Twoim zestawie

Ad .2 W pierwszej wersji było "Korekta ul. Hubskiej i pozostałych po remoncie", zauważyłem, że mam jeszcze linie 810 do poprawy. Widocznie nie zamknąłem pierwszego zestawu

Ad. 3 Wjazd był nie oznaczony, dopiero teraz zauważyłem, że jest na Suchej śluza do skrętu. (Dodam)

Ad. 4 Podejrzewałem, że po uruchomieniu linii 16, może być dłużej oraz w weekendy włączona
BCNorwich (2019-06-24 13:54:41+00:00): Hello, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Firstly please look at this page :- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course which is a pretty good guide to tagging golf facilities.

Regards Bernard.
BCNorwich (2019-06-24 14:09:35+00:00): Comments on your mapping so far. The tees, bunkers, fairway and club house do not need the tag leisure=golf_course as this tag is on the greater/overall course area.

The tees and bunkers could have a description of their surface, surface=grass, surface=sand.

If you need any help please just ask.

Regards Bernard.
berndw (2019-06-26 09:13:29+00:00): Hallo schrammi05
Willkommen bei OSM

Hat diese Bank auch einen Geldautomten?
SCNR

Ich denk mal, du wolltest eher eine Sitzbank (amenity=bench) erstellen, dann könntest du die Bank 50 Meter als Vorbild nehmen oder diese an die korrekte Position verschieben

Bei Fragen stehe ich zur Verfügung

Bernd
berndw (2019-07-21 09:43:01+00:00): Keine Antwort, also selbst Hand angelegt.

BTW, benutze bitte einen richtigen Editor
habi (2019-06-24 11:14:44+00:00): Hallo
Da 'review requested': Der Recycling-Container (amenity=recycling) muss/sollte nicht die Details im Namen tragen.
Dass dort Kleider, Altglas und Alu entsorgt werden können, kann über den 'recycling'-Tag markiert werden: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Drecycling
habi (2019-06-24 11:20:23+00:00): Ich hab' mir die Freiheit rausgenommen, das zu korrigieren: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/71557478
do_h (2019-06-24 11:27:30+00:00): Danke, ich habe lediglich den Typ von "Gebäude" zu "Recyclingstelle" geändert.
Danke für die Korrektur.
user_5359 (2019-06-24 15:13:34+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Note that in OSM description of the objects has the highest priority. Objects that have only one name, have little sense. As home page for the question "How do I describe you?" I recommend the web site http://wiki.openstreetmap.org.
ChehrehBargi (2019-11-05 18:57:25+00:00): با سلام
در رابطه با اتصال 699368548 ؛ دوربرگردان در بلوار بهشت فاطمه: مسیرهایی که به طور جداگانه و یا حداقل با تابلو مشخص نشده اند به عنوان دوربرگردان ثبت نمی‌کنیم.
موفق باشید و لطفا دقت بفرمایید.
باسپاس
snigdhap (2019-07-23 08:44:58+00:00): Hi  RunRunShow,

Trust you are well. While reviewing the road network in Sibu, I have come across the way 699449794
way 699369667

classified as 'track and service'. However, going by the aerial imagery and other ways around,it can be classified as 'residential'.

Please look into this and share your thoughts on this. 

Thanks in advance.
RunRunShow (2019-07-23 12:19:55+00:00): Hi snigdhap,

699449794 is likely a dirt road leading to a farming plot with residential building. Look at node 6568162887 you should be able to see that it's not paved. Therefore the residential road ends at node 3966988671 where there's a small scale residential development.

699369667 is a road leading to indigenous people settlement from the residential development further out. This type of road is usually 1 lane, narrow with no centre line. Therefore service road is applicable.
BCNorwich (2019-06-24 14:30:42+00:00): Hello and Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

You've actually placed the building inside an existing building. The existing building is named Michigan Building, is 99 Blackwall Way within the Michigan Building.

Regards Bernard.
BCNorwich (2019-06-30 19:18:56+00:00): No response so building removed.
Leo Slager (2019-06-24 21:08:44+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
Leo Slager (2019-06-24 21:10:46+00:00): Dag Jordy,
Er staat nu een playground in en playground.
Ik zal de oude node weghalen.
De naam speeltuin is vast niet de officiele naam en hoort dus niet op de kaart.
BCNorwich (2019-06-25 07:00:14+00:00): Hi, Please see my Changeset: 71587322  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/71587322 for the changes I've made.
ChehrehBargi (2020-10-02 19:33:47+00:00): با سلام و تشکر از توجه شما به بهسازی OSM
در بعضی از مسیرها از تگ private استفاده کرده‌اید؛ که احتمالا برای محدودسازی و ممانعت از مسیریابی هنگام استفاده از gps اسنپ یا مسیریابهای دیگر، اعمال نموده‌اید.
تگ صحیح محدودسازی، destination است که تنها می‌توان برای مسیرهایی که عموم اجازه تردد ندارند مثل دانشگاه‌ها و یا دیگر محل‌ها مانند جایگاه‌های سوخت و ... استفاده نمود؛ و به این معنی است که فقط در صورت انتخاب به عنوان مقصد یا نقطه بین راهی از آنها مسیریابی شود.
لذا مسیر ارتباطی پارک صنعتی و نیز مسیر اتصال دهنده کنارگذر به میدان آزادگان به علت آزاد بودن تردد و بن بست نبودن، به دسترسی مجاز و همچنین تگ highway=residential تغییر پیدا می‌کنند.
Jarek 🚲 (2019-06-26 02:21:32+00:00): Hi, did you mean to leave a gap in Eglinton Avenue near https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/43.69956/-79.43191 by deleting https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/446073986/history or was this accidental?
BCNorwich (2019-06-25 07:18:54+00:00): Hi, 
I merged the data for pub building and POI, no need for two mapped features on one item.

Merged the data for church building and POI, no need for two mapped features on one item. The name is now on the building.

Moved car park off of the center line of Lockram Lane, added parking aisle.

Squared up buildings.

Regards.
BCNorwich (2019-06-25 07:30:29+00:00): Hi,
I merged the data for Travis Perkins building and POI, no need for two mapped features on one item.

You added layer=-1 and tunnel=yes to the whole of Way: 377106487. These tags should only be added to the tunnel section, (under a building). I've amended this but is there more than one tunnel section?

Regards.
literan (2019-07-04 19:28:16+00:00): вот вы красавец. Поставили access=no на кусок обхода Одинцово, и закрыли его для всех навигаторов этим
pitscheplatsch (2019-06-27 06:41:12+00:00): #test #failed

Please don't add test data to the live OSM Server. 
If you want a test server, perhaps http://api06.dev.openstreetmap.org/ would work for you? Furthermore, can you revert your edits?

--- 
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
sincorchetes (2019-06-27 22:10:59+00:00): Hi, How I can delete? I'm learning.
pitscheplatsch (2019-06-28 06:19:58+00:00): reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/71638308
pitscheplatsch (2019-06-27 06:41:21+00:00): #test #failed

Please don't add test data to the live OSM Server. 
If you want a test server, perhaps http://api06.dev.openstreetmap.org/ would work for you? Furthermore, can you revert your edits?

--- 
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
Hjart (2019-06-24 10:52:17+00:00): Vil det sige man ikke kan gå ud på Svendborgvej ad stien?
TOTO-DK (2019-06-24 11:04:48+00:00): Hej Hjart

 

Jeg prøver at lave en gangsti, som kun er mellem de to matrikler, men efter upload kædede den sig på Svendborgvej.

 

Nu har jeg prøvet at lave med ikke-kædede slutpunkter....
  

Venlig hilsen

Tom
Hjart (2019-06-24 12:16:22+00:00): Det var mig der koblede den på Svendborgvej. Det er en almindelig begynderfejl kun at trække stier ud til fortovet og på flyfotos ser det ud til at man kan passere ud på Svendborgvej. Hvis ikke man kan det, var det naturligvis en fejl.
Hjart (2019-06-24 12:19:37+00:00): Sagen er at navigation ad stien ikke vil kunne fungere hvis ikke den er koblet på tilstødende veje
TOTO-DK (2019-06-24 12:38:18+00:00): OK - god pointe, det er rettet ;-)
aceman444 (2020-11-01 23:31:14+00:00): Sorry, this is not how you make passing places on a 1-lane road. The oneway segments you have created are non-sense. You can only split a road into separate segments for each direction, if there is a physical barrier between the directions, or at least a double solid line or diagonal stripes (when it adds anything useful).
Jakka (2019-06-25 09:03:47+00:00): nu je deze weg twee richtingen geworden is, mag de verwijzing voor fietsers en snorfietsen verwijderd worden, deze is nu ook overbodig. oneway:bicycle 	no
oneway:moped_a 	no
mavl (2019-07-22 16:05:02+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: copyrighted data were used.
BCNorwich (2019-12-18 08:06:07+00:00): Hi, Most of the sections of Gran Via that you edited in this changeset are now duplicated. Unfortunately there are many relations, routes and boundaries involved. These duplications are incorrect, (there are not two highways on the same line). The integrity of every relation is also in doubt.

Could you please go back and remove your duplication and repair the relations?

Thanks Bernard.
uks (2019-07-02 15:25:47+00:00): Изучите классификацию дорог, принятую  в сообществе, прежде чем вносить правки! https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Highway_classification
Carlos Eduardo Rodríguez (2021-08-25 01:55:03+00:00): Hola que tal, quiero preguntarte acerca de ese límite que colocaste de Canto del Llano, Corregimiento de Canto del Llano, en el Distrito de Veraguas  en qué te basaste?.
Carlos Eduardo Rodríguez (2021-08-25 01:55:22+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8906430#map=15/8.1196/-80.9661&layers=N
Leo Slager (2019-06-24 21:40:52+00:00): Hoi Marijn,
service=busway is tot nog toe niet gebruikt in Nederland.
service=bus is tot nog toe enkele tientallen keren gebruikt.
Volgens de NL-wiki wordt de busbaan voorzien van
highway=service
access=no
psv=yes
Het toevoegen van service=bus lijkt mij dus een betere oplossing.
ma-rt-in (2019-06-25 11:25:04+00:00): Hallo,
Glückwunsch zu deiner ersten Bearbeitung. Nun habe ich aber noch eine Anmerkung zu deiner Änderung. Bitte entferne doch die Klammern/Schrägstrich und Leerzeichen aus der Telefonnumer. Die sind hier unnötig.
vg
GinaroZ (2019-06-24 15:39:31+00:00): Thanks for the Mapillary images, allowed me to confirm and add missing speed limits.
Diógenes de Sinope (2019-06-25 13:42:58+00:00): Hi thetornado76, thank you for correcting those parking:lane: tags, I will use the 'parallel' rather than the 'inline' key when I use the aformentioned tag in the future, as an aside, I really wish the iD editor had an expanded graphical user interface so as to make the mapping proccess more intuitive
thetornado76 (2019-06-26 14:23:15+00:00): Hi, nice to see you've seen my changes. Wanted to write to you about that, about the 'parallel' and point it out. Do you know JOSM there you can set a style for parking.
Diógenes de Sinope (2019-06-26 14:46:58+00:00): 😬 style(?) although I acknowledge that JOSM is a more powerful tool than the iD editor, I began mapping using latter, I use JOSM for tasks that would be too tedious to do in the iD editor, however, the inconsistancy with the two interfaces is what shys me away learning how to use it
Belemi (2019-06-24 20:03:09+00:00): Es sieht so aus, als wurden Änderungen von mir Rückgängig gemacht. Leider habe ich meine Wegpunkte von Navi bereits gelöscht. Aber die Karte stimmt an der Stelle nun nicht mehr ganz mit der Realität überein.
szydzio (2019-06-25 07:32:02+00:00): Ich hab nur die früher gelöschten Tags wiederhergestellt => https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=71559224 , denn dieser way funktioniert dort eben als eine Straße => http://slubice.e-mapa.net?userview=79 . Den Verlauf der Straße habe ich aber nicht geändert, er entspricht den Luftbildern des polnischen Geoportal => http://mapy.geoportal.gov.pl/imap/Imgp_2.html?locale=pl&gui=new&sessionID=4623633
Frans S (2019-06-24 15:20:52+00:00): Hello, Thanks for mapping. Will you please keep yourself to the mapping requirements? Just buildings in this project.
Best regards and keep mapping
Steube (2019-07-03 12:29:50+00:00): Den Weg gibt es wohl als Trampelpfad. Jedoch sollte bei der Querung des Papierbaches eine Furt (ford=yes) ergänzt werden, da es nach meiner Erinnerung an dieser Stelle keine Brücke/ keinen Steg gibt.
__k (2019-07-03 12:41:01+00:00): Bis 2018 gab es da eine Brücke, jetzt liegen da mehrere Steine im Bachbett. Hab den Punkt modifiziert.
Cézar Augusto (2019-06-24 12:35:18+00:00): I forgot the name, its name is "Sociedade 25 de julho". I'll add it later.
shasband (2019-07-05 11:14:02+00:00): Apologies for using internal terminologies in OSM. I am new to OSM and We have been advised by senior team members to follow OSM standards while commenting. Please find below the comment for the actual edit – added a service road from Higdon Road and added a drive way from it, added a service road and a drive way from the same road
Frans S (2019-06-25 07:34:12+00:00): Hi Pietrofù. I took a look to this changeset
first. When you upload do not change the hash info. Just summarize what you've done. (after the hash info) On the comment field of the task on TM3 you can leave an extended comment. Now I have to check other mappings to know the project number.
This is an opportunity to improve your mapping skills. I do not know which task this is. When it is still open for mapping, open it, run the validating tool end try to solve the results.  There are 4 different sorts of warnings etc here. If the task is already closed, give me the project and task number that I can invalidate it so you can continue wit mapping and correcting
Main objective here, Align the mapped buildings with the imagery and solve the warnings etc
Best regards
Frans S (2019-06-25 07:39:26+00:00): The original mappings were done with the Bing Imagery. MAXAR P where we are now working on is more recent so new buildings are visible and old ones can be disappeared This has to be corrected.
Best regards
Pietrofù (2019-06-25 13:34:52+00:00): Sorry, I use JOSM and I forgot to copy the hashtags from the infos here on the site. Sorry.

Project 3968, square #574.

If you want, I modify also the highways and the "warnings". Just tell me. Sorry for my mistakes.

This are the tags #TanzaniaDevelopmentTrust #Tanzania #missingmaps #crowd2map #hotosm-project-3968
Frans S (2019-06-25 14:12:26+00:00): Hi. Yes try to correct everything. When you are finished let me know which changeset you made.
succes
trial (2019-10-29 12:42:48+00:00): merci de ne pas confondre hangar pour le métro et hangar aéronautique (oui iD est trompeur)
freeExec (2019-06-25 06:26:44+00:00): В ОСМ действует правило "правда на земле", т.е. если на доме висит табличка 11А, то так он и должен быть отмечен. Вообще "корпус А" выглядит странным. И потом даже если это корпус, то обозначен должен быть как "11 кА", смотри соглашение https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:ВикиПроект_Россия/Голосования/Правила_написания_номеров_домов
А то что где-то там не ищется это в общем-то не проблема ОСМ и ради этого мы данные не меняем.
kveselkov (2019-06-25 06:31:20+00:00): Хорошо. Вернул изменения.
frosm (2019-06-24 14:22:56+00:00): Bonjour et bienvenue
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:WikiProject_France/bienvenue
si le nom "Chemin de l'élevage" est bien celui du chemin, il faut le mettre sur le chemin lui meme
bonne continuation
tkoval83 (2019-06-24 13:35:37+00:00): Привіт
Подивися краще
Там ця будівля не повністю обведена
SomeoneElse (2019-06-28 14:05:03+00:00): Hello,
Can you please explain your change to the access tags on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/468998080 ?
Best Regards,
Andy
purbitap (2019-06-30 12:07:07+00:00): Hi Andy,With reference to the motor vehicles parked in the satellite imagery added motor_vehicle access tags to this road. But as per community request reverting my changes. Do let me know if you have any further questions.
Changeset#71754748
Regards,
purbitap
SomeoneElse (2019-06-30 20:05:31+00:00): Hello,
Thanks for that
Best Regards,
Andy
SomeoneElse (2019-07-05 16:01:38+00:00): Hello,
It looks like your addition of the motor_vehicle=yes tag to qqq may have the same issue as previously discussed at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/71673099 ?  Can you have a look at where you've added motor_vehicle=yes elsewhere without evidence and remove it?
Best Regards,
Andy
hkkollip (2019-07-09 09:49:40+00:00): Hi Andy,As per your suggestion the  motor_vehicle=yes that was added to the track roads have been reverted. I checked all these type of edits and reverted wherever necessary. Thanks for your insights. Changeset-72046616.

Regards,
hkkollip
SomeoneElse (2019-07-09 09:57:12+00:00): Hello hkkollip,
Thanks for that.
Best Regards,
Andy
StephaneP (2019-07-03 15:11:58+00:00): Bonjour PomAbrico,
Tu dis que les barrières ont été enlevées, mais la piste est-elle accessible ? Parce que pour l'instant, il y a toujours le tag access=no.
Autre chose, tu as ajouté cycleway=shared_lane, qui est un tag utilisé pour indiquer la présence de pictogrammes sur une route "standard" (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/shared_lane) Je ne pense pas que c'est ce que tu souhaitais "dire".

A bientôt
Stéphane de Carto'Cité pour #CartoVeloIDF
PomAbrico (2019-07-03 20:54:42+00:00): Bonjour,
En effet les pictos sont sur le trottoir et pas sur la route. 
Les barrières avaient été enlevées depuis plusieurs mois laissant une piste double sens côté nord du pont, et une piste ouest vers est côté sud. Je n'avais pas remarqué le tag "Access" :(
Depuis lundi 1/7 des travaux ont commencé côté nord. La piste double sens côté nord est fermée temporairement et remplacée par une double sens côté sud.
J'espère avoir été compréhensible, la situation sur ce pont est mouvante, mais j'y passe tous les jours en vélotaf :)
Désolée pour l'erreur de tag. 
Bonne soirée, 
Pom.
StephaneP (2019-07-05 15:13:45+00:00): Ah oui, c'est un peu compliqué.
Bon, j'ai corrigé les shared_lane et supprimé les access=no.
Si les travaux ne sont pas longs, je pense qu'on peut laisser comme ça. Si ca dure plusieurs mois, alors il faudrait mettre à jour avec la réalité.
SI tu doutes de la bonne méthode, n'hesite pas à ma contacter.

Stéphane
lyctkel (2022-07-01 08:14:47+00:00): Здравствуйте Дмитрий Вадим,
В настоящее время я исследую некоторые редко используемые теги building=*.
В процессе я нашел https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?way=236869644, который использует building=demolitions.
Этот тег используется только здесь.
С моей точки зрения, ruins:building=yes подходит лучше.
Смотрите https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ruins: и https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:demolished: для подробностей.
Если у вас есть вопросы, пожалуйста, не стесняйтесь связаться со мной.
С уважением,
lyctkel
-----------------------
Hi Дмитрів Вадим,
currently I'm investigating some rarely used building=* tags.
In the process I found https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?way=236869644 which uses building=demolitions.
This tag is only used here.
From my point of view ruins:building=yes would fit better.
See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ruins: and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:demolished: for details.
If you have questions, please feel free to contact me.
Regards,
lyctkel
StephaneP (2019-07-03 10:35:20+00:00): Bonjour Chlc,

A propos des modifs sur ces chemins :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/228838848/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/35583203/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/228669476/history

Qu'est-ce qui t'a fait pensé que les tags utilisés par les précédents contributeurs étaient faux ?
Si je prends l'exemple de https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/228838848
Et qu'on regarde l'historique, on voit que certains contributeurs connaissent le secteur (local knowledge), et que d'autres sont passés avec une caméra (source=Mapillary).
Et effectivement, en regardant les photos 360 de cette zone sur Mapillary, il y a bien des panonceaux pour les cyclistes.

J'ai corrigé : https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/71853194

A bientôt
Stéphane de Carto'Cité pour #CartoVeloIDF
StephaneP (2019-07-03 13:43:55+00:00): Autre chose : Ce n'est pas parce qu'il y a des pictos de vélo sur la voie, que c'est une piste cyclable. Exemple : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/99435015
Tu as remplacé footway par cycleway, mais non, c'est seulement un trottoir autorisé aux vélos :
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo&pKey=6Y2fg0RBzV2EPFjeHDK6ZA&lat=48.888705966000884&lng=2.1594631040027252&z=17&x=0.8608691716830504&y=0.5344982366974683&zoom=1.0883421251133265
Est indiqué : Vélos autorisés, priorité aux piétons

Stéphane de Carto'Cité pour #CartoVeloIDF
GOwin (2019-06-29 05:23:09+00:00): Hi @GrabPHMikko.

Could you and your team please try to be more descriptive with your changeset comments?

What kind of routing has specifically changed? 

Digging further, you can avoid deleting  a segment and edit instead so that the element's history is retained.
mapbeks (2019-07-01 08:10:22+00:00): Thank you Erwin for the heads up. We will be more specific. As per checking from our resources and reported by our driver that the deleted road is actually not passable and has a large wall on it. Noted as well with the editing
GOwin (2019-07-01 08:29:53+00:00): If that is the basis of your edit, it would be great if you add them in the changeset comment. Also, if indeed there's a "wall blocking" a road, it doesn't necessitate the deletion of the road itself.

Please refer to barrier options from the wiki, with appropriate access values.
Leo Slager (2019-06-24 21:16:07+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
Leo Slager (2019-06-24 21:19:01+00:00): Dag Piebe,
source=BAG heeft betrekking op de import van het gebouw en de adresnode.
Dat moet dus niet aangevuld worden met local knowledge. Dat hoort thuis in het commentaar bij de changeset.
mueschel (2019-06-25 07:10:21+00:00): Hi,
you used the key 'man-made' on several objects. The correct spelling would be 'man_made'. Could you have a look and fix this?
voschix (2020-01-29 17:56:33+00:00): What is surface_bike?
scruss (2019-08-20 18:45:07+00:00): Thanks for the edits! Looks like changing the natural=coastline to natural=wetland broke the map a bit though