piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
tiggertrash (2020-01-11 11:39:56+00:00): Hi,
I'm in this hotel now. It exists, believe me.
The website is https://www.atrio-madeira.com

Maybe your database is not up to date.

Do my changes need your justification?
I thought that OSM is community driven.
I'm wondering why I need to explain my changes sometimes in OSM.
Maybe you can trust people as long as there is no reason todo not. ;-)

Please don't understand me wrong, but other mapper reverted my changes in the past because of outdated pictures.
You ask for justification because of an outdates database.
It doesn't make it easier for me, when I have to justify every change that I make.
I hope you understand my point.
I know you have good interests and I appreciate that. But maybe your mistrust and your call for justification is a bit over the top.

Thanks for your understanding.

Best regards
tiggertrash (2020-01-11 11:58:08+00:00): Sorry, one question from my previous post was wrong:
Instead of
Do my changes need your justification?
I wanted to say
Do my changes need your approval?
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2020-01-11 12:16:08+00:00): hi, thanks for replying. the need to justify is perfectly normal in OSM as we have conventions and national guidelines.
Legally the hotel, needs to be registered to operate, the hotel in question, is legally a "rural hotel" with license number 6427 as documented in RNET with these details https://ibb.co/yn25PrX 
We might work in a better hotel classification in OSM for Portugal as clearly an hotel and rural hotel is not the same.

Thanks for your classification and enjoy your stay in Madeira
emvee (2020-01-26 16:48:53+00:00): Bedankt voor de correctie, ja op Mapillary gezien dat de fietspaden in twee richten gebruikt mogen worden.

Verkeerslichten verder bijgewerkt, zie https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/80102912
eggie (2020-01-10 21:19:33+00:00): Lijkt me prima zo... 
Gr Eggie
user_5359 (2020-01-11 06:04:22+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please don't mark single building as landuse=residential. Please use building=yes. (see The Pearl)
Ficky IRM-RV (2021-02-17 01:31:03+00:00): Hi units,
I've modified this road (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/762350106) based on maxar premium. I also made some changes around this changeset.
Thank you, happy mapping!
VA00 (2020-10-21 16:33:55+00:00): Czy stacja Mysłowice Kosztowy naprawdę leży w szczerym polu? Nie ma do niej żadnej normalnej drogi, tylko same ścieżki wydeptane w trawie?
zuicz (2020-10-21 17:15:36+00:00): Tak. Z resztą przystanki Brzęczkowice i Brzezinka też są w fatalnych lokalizacjach.
Info z grudnia 2019:
Niemiłe zaskoczenie czeka podróżnych Kolei Śląskich korzystających z przystanku Mysłowice Kosztowy na linii z Katowic do Oświęcimia. Obecnie zatrzymują się tam wszystkie pociągi Kolei Śląskich, od 15 grudnia większość przestanie się zatrzymywać. Jedynie pociągi o godz. 6.02 do Bytomia i godz. 6.55 do Lublińca oraz po południu o godz. 16.06 i godz. 17.03 do Oświęcimia zatrzymają się w Mysłowicach Kosztowach. Na tej trasie godzinę później odjedzie ostatni pociąg z Oświęcimia do Lublińca. Obecnie jedzie on o godz. 19.55, od nowego rozkładu o godz. 20.51.
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-08-11 21:59:50+00:00): removido
czubi (2020-01-13 14:02:15+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7123317965#map=19/50.94440/11.60693&layers=N

Das Tor gehört IN den Zaum.sozusagen als gemeinsamer node Zaun und Straße
Versuchs mal selbst.
tomhelm (2020-01-13 20:31:41+00:00): Hi czubi, hoffe das passt so.
czubi (2020-01-14 11:49:15+00:00): Naja, fast. Denkst Du nicht das der Weg auch DURCH das Tor geht?
Siehe meine erste  Anmerkung.
Weg, Zaun und Tor sind ein GEMEINSAMER Punkt.
tomhelm (2020-01-14 12:33:27+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis.
Linux Alpes (2020-01-19 09:08:23+00:00): Est-ce que ce sentier est actuellement interdit à la circulation ?
S'il n'est pas praticable, on peut peut-être mettre un tag approprié plutôt que de faire figurer l'information dans le nom.
Ou supprimer le chemin s'il n'est plus d'actualité.
abakus_uploader (2020-01-10 23:32:05+00:00): (Wiadomość automatyczna)
Cześć!
Otrzymujesz ten komentarz, ponieważ dodałeś lub zmodyfikowałeś adres, który jest niepełny lub błędny.
Adres powinien zawierać minimum trzy znaczniki: addr:city=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:street=[nazwa_ulicy] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Wyjątkiem są miejscowości bez nazwanych ulic - wtedy stosujemy znaczniki: addr:place=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Bez poprawnego oznaczenia adresów, nie będą one brane pod uwagę przez wyszukiwarki, dlatego warto je dostosować do ww. schematu (w zależności od sytuacji).
Więcej informacji na forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632 - a pytania najlepiej zadawać tu: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=681873
Pozdrawiamy!
noelbov (2020-01-10 22:12:01+00:00): Dear Jens V

I don't know what corrections you've made but now there are problems reported (unused segments and unaccessibility).
See:https://www.knooppuntnet.nl/en/route/4271
Thanks for correcting this.

N.
Jens V (2020-01-11 11:48:38+00:00): It's not clear to me what places or objects have been made unaccessible or unused. In that respect OSM editor isn't very clear. As I've been removing some bicycle paths from the road (in case of clearly seperate bicycle paths and according to osm-practices), creating new bicycle highways next to the car higway but in the process I may have erased additional features like bicycle track numbers. Unfortunately, I cannot correct this as I need to know exactly where the error has occured. I think it is better if you'd add the track information (05-08) yourself. Sorry for the inconvenience, but I think it has more to with problems of OSM interacting with other sites than with editors like me. Thanks for your remark. I hope I've not caused too much problems.

Jens
noelbov (2020-01-11 17:10:24+00:00): I've corrected this and cycleway 03-15 too.
I'm asking me why do you draw separate cycle ways when the car highway has tags like:

cycleway:buffer=2
cycleway:right=track
cycleway:surface=paving_stones:30
cycleway:width=1.80
highway=tertiary
maxspeed:default=built-up_area
maxspeed=50
name=Ruggeveldlaan
oneway=yes
surface=asphalt

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycleway:buffer

N.
Jens V (2020-01-12 11:52:51+00:00): I understand your remark. I started editing some bicyclepaths in the vicinity of where I live, because OSM mentions that seperate bicycle paths can be marked as a seperate kind of highway. In this case the tracks (for bicycles) on the adjacent (car) highways are best removed. See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Cycleway

I must admit, having seen your rightfull remarks, that OSM had better indicated possible problems when removing bicycle tracks from general roads to adjacent (but seperate) bicycle highways possibly "injures" bicycle routings, as I did with "your' routes. There should be a clearer warning for these kinds of problems.

Having seen this, I think this is actually somewhat of a negative problem of OSM. They should choose: either only have 1 kind of highway, indicating PER trajectory which vehicles are allowed and which ones aren't, instead of having all kinds of different names AND objects for roads, tracks, lanes etc.

I'll look out better next time when I remove a numbered bicycle track from a road.

Greetings
HubMiner (2024-01-22 18:56:54+00:00): Greetings! 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4699296936

Please consider changing:
site=tumulus TO:
archaeological_site=tumulus

Documentation:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aarchaeological_site%3Dtumulus
user_5359 (2020-01-11 04:54:05+00:00): Hello! Please check the keys of the http://www.osm.org/way/762363832. You added a key amenity(=parking) and amenty(=bus_station). I assumed you can delete the second key.
DiogoBaptista98 (2020-01-25 03:14:31+00:00): falso, o que acabou de referir é mentiroso, e acabou por destruir novamente material novo e actualizado. o que eu fiz enquadra-se nos padrões, refiz o terminal, coloquei as gates como pontos como indicou e coloquei partes do edificio (as gates) como construções separadas e com outras definições construtivas. Vou ter que refazer o que destruiu, mas antes quero chegar a um acordo. Se voltar a destruir conteúdo em bom estado terei que o denunciar.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2020-01-25 06:08:06+00:00): Bem Diogo, antes de me chamares mentiroso, vê os factos que estão bem documentados.
Não reverteste as gates, fizeste novas, não respeitando o histórico dos elementos que já cá estavam há sete, sim sete anos.
Quanto aos novos elementos do terminal que adicionaste, conforme indiquei, deves utilizar building part e não como building como fizeste.
Não há acordo algum a alcançar, as regras estão bem definidas na wiki pela comunidade. Isto não é o teu mapa, é o mapa da comunidade que obedece a regras.
Quanto ao me denunciares, está à vontade, está tudo muito bem documentado o que fizeste em cada conjunto de alterações, inclusive muitas de origem duvidosa e que pode levantar sérios problemas.
M!dgard (2021-08-07 07:42:00+00:00): Gelieve lantaarnpalen niet vast te maken aan grasperken e.d.
Ahmad Tofighi (2020-01-12 11:11:50+00:00): این میدان تغییر نام داده نشده ! میدان شهید سلیمانی در ایتدای جاده محمد آباد, در دست احداث است...
iriman (2020-01-12 12:53:19+00:00): سلام. این تغییرنام رو کاربر دیگری انجام داده بود. من به اعتبار اینکه تغییر نام درست انجام شده اطلاعات دیگری اضافه کردم.

میتونید مکان میدانی که در دست احداثه رو بفرمایید؟ من اصلاحات لازم رو انجام میدم.
tanonin (2021-07-05 20:20:19+00:00): Est ce qu'il n'y a pas des ajouts plus utiles que l'ajout de lampadaire?
tanonin (2021-07-07 19:33:38+00:00): Je suis plutôt convaincu par l' "essai" néanmoins je reste assez sceptique de l'exploitation des données sans tag spécifique permettant de spécifier le type de source lumineuse ou la présence de réflecteur.
La remarque était plutôt une critique du "chair-mapping" (je présume) car oui je pense qu'il y a des données plus importantes à ajouter sur OSM et je suis pour une hiérarchisation des données à ajouter, sans qu'il n'y ait de consensus à ma connaissance mais je trouve que c'est du bon sens. (on s'accordera qu'un endroit cartographié uniquement par des lampadaire présente peu d’intérêt). Pour parler d'un exemple concret je pense que la boîte au lettre postale que j'ai ajouté au lampadaire est plus utile pour la communauté que les, admettons, 200 lampadaires sur l'ensemble de la commune.
Pour ce qui est du « Do not tag for the renderer » je ne vois pas le rapport ici mais étant donné que la carte est faite pour être utilisée je pense qu'on peut faire des compromis dans certaines situations pour avoir une carte "exploitable" (là encore si OSM n'était qu'une BDD elle n'aurait pas d'intêret. Pour le dire simplement je contribue à OSM parce que je l'utilise.
"quels sont les critères d’inclusion à OpenStreetMap ?"
Ils n'y en a pas, pour autant la carte est structurée donc hiérarchique, si la carte comportait tous les éléments de base je ne verrais pas de problème à ce que chacun ajoute ses fantaisies malheureusement ce n'est pas le cas.
Je souhaite néanmoins nuancer mon propos en ajoutant que toute contribution est bonne à prendre mais j'attirais juste l'attention sur le fait qu'il y a peut être des éléments plus utiles à ajouter en priorité.
user_1566574 (2021-07-08 09:35:26+00:00): Pourquoi les boîtes postales et pas les adresses & bâtis ?
OSM = 2 opposés. D'un côté on a du retard sur certains aspects, de l'autre on est incontournable voire avant-gardiste sur certaines données. (Je pense aux aménagements cyclables, où l'État, comme le reste du monde, se repose totalement sur OSM.)
Problème : Il y a des demandeurs pour les 2.
Vu de ma fenêtre chacun de vous a raison.
Bon courage à vous pour faire réponse plus courte. ;)
tanonin (2021-07-08 20:12:28+00:00): On va en rester là, j'ouvrais juste le débat sur peut être des priorités à ajouter mais effectivement tout est relatif, j'ai participé un peu au projet HOT mais je me sens plus utiles à contribuer aux données proche de moi qu'a l'autre bout du monde.
Effectivement chacun contribue à sa manière et c'est très bien comme ça même si je resterai un peu vert quand de la boîte au lettre sur le lampadaire c'est le lampadaire qui est cartho 😉.
En faisant une recherche sur les objets j'étais tombé sur un noeud sans attributs mais effectivement les autres en ont et ça ajoute plus de valeur à la carte.
PS: tkt Anto les adresses et bâtis (et + si affinité) arrivent, encore 3 semaines à tourner sur Montperreux 😉
user_1566574 (2021-07-08 20:50:43+00:00): Haha je donnais bâtis & adresses comme exemple, perso ça m'a fait bizarre quand un service basé sur OSM m'a dit que, bon, désolé, mais on va plutôt utiliser Google Maps parce qu'il manque trop d'adresses à OSM. Aouch. Donc là j'ai compris que le micro-mapping c'est top, ça fait chaud au cœur quand on lit certains articles, mais il nous manque aussi des bases et ça, danger.

Après éventuellement si tu vas du côté de Malbuisson, n'hésites pas à ajouter la voie cyclable qui doit être sur https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/176439008. Si tu fais ça bien, tu vas devenir meilleur pote avec ton autre interlocuteur... 😉 Merci Anto !
tanonin (2021-07-08 21:25:08+00:00): Ah oui dur, il m'a fallu deux essais pour trouver une adresse mal placée sur ggmap (5-6 maisons d'écart) mais bon..
Pour malbuisson tu parles des mêmes pistes cyclable que ce dont on avait parlé du côté de bulle/frasne?
user_1566574 (2021-07-08 21:49:46+00:00): Ah c'est sûr que GMaps fait de l'import un peu brut mais bon, ils ont des adresses...
Tacle bien reçu ;) Mais non, je crois que celles-ci sont bien tracés, bien concrètes (but surface=asphalt).
RicoElectrico (2020-01-13 11:47:39+00:00): Hi, this note claims the surface is made of paving stones, not asphalt: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2055678
CRCulver (2020-01-13 15:23:06+00:00): As I specified in my changeset, my source was Mapillary imagery. It shows asphalt.
maraf24 (2020-01-26 21:59:15+00:00): Partially reverted - fake sidewalks.
JodaStephen (2020-01-10 23:44:09+00:00): Hi there, you just deleted a school building for no good reason that I can see. Your edit history is also very fast and widespread. Can you provide more info on how you are editing?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/79437919
oba510 (2020-01-13 04:00:54+00:00): In this changeset you actually deleted Mcdonalds completely when you moved the building (while leaving the building and address info).  Was that your intention?
gen2020 (2020-01-13 17:46:11+00:00): Ah, sorry, that was not my intention. I have added name, McDonald's. Please feel free to correct my change if there are still any problems. Thanks!
ivanbranco (2022-06-29 12:58:39+00:00): Hi brianh :)

I found this place=historic_locality from two years ago.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/10569993/history

This place value is not very common (it's used here only), I was thinking to change it with place=locality+historic=yes, what do you think about it?
viloan (2020-01-10 23:50:36+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt
Se você está mapeando por causa do jogo do Harry Potter, as dicas e explicações na página anterior também são úteis para você.

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
SomeoneElse (2020-08-01 13:57:01+00:00): Hello Соел,
In this change you've claimed that you used a source of Bing.  Clearly that's not possible here since the only change that you made was to add a road name, something not visible on Bing aerial imagery.
It's been suggested in the forum that you're copying names from Google - unfortunately we can't let names added that way stay in OSM as their licence is not compatible with ours.
Please explain the actual source that you used here; if it was Google we'll need to remove it (and other similar edits) from OSM.
Also please don't just use changeset comments like "new road".  That doesn't help anyone else in OpenStreetMap to understand what you are doing.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.
SomeoneElse (2020-08-01 13:57:36+00:00): Привет Соел,
В этом изменении вы заявили, что использовали источник Bing. Понятно, что здесь это невозможно, поскольку единственное изменение, которое вы сделали, - добавление названия дороги, чего-то невидимого на аэрофотоснимках Bing.
На форуме было предложено копировать имена из Google - к сожалению, мы не можем позволить именам, добавленным таким образом, оставаться в OSM, поскольку их лицензия не совместима с нашей.
Пожалуйста, объясните фактический источник, который вы использовали здесь; если это был Google, нам нужно удалить его (и другие подобные изменения) из OSM.
Также, пожалуйста, не просто используйте комментарии ревизии, такие как "новая дорога". Это не поможет никому другому в OpenStreetMap понять, что вы делаете.
Наилучшие пожелания,
Энди Таунсенд, от имени Рабочей группы OSM по данным.
viloan (2020-01-11 01:38:46+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt
Se você está mapeando por causa do jogo do Harry Potter, as dicas e explicações na página anterior também são úteis para você.

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
MapMakerGal (2020-01-11 15:11:39+00:00): ¿Por qué borras los name:gl y wikipedia:gl? NO los toques, gracias.
Verdy_p (2020-01-11 16:35:13+00:00): These are already the default names ("gl" is implicit). Castillano (es) is added as an alternate.
Verdy_p (2020-01-11 16:38:24+00:00): Also I did not remove anything. I ADDED these missing comarcas with all relevant info.
MapMakerGal (2020-01-11 16:39:17+00:00): Every label is not negligible as long as it fulfills its function, thanks
Verdy_p (2020-01-11 16:54:47+00:00): Yes but it is superfluous when it is the same as the default (and Galician usually fallbacks also to Spanish when it is looked for, so there's no surprizing selection of another specific name for other languages).
Do you intend to add diffferent names or links in Portuguese (still not present) and fear the fallback from Galician to Portuguese ? Portuguese also defaults to the default name, not to Spanish/Castellano...
Verdy_p (2020-01-11 16:55:22+00:00): So which "function is fulfilled" ?
MapMakerGal (2020-01-11 16:59:13+00:00): No matter that, the more information you contribute the better, avoiding obsolete labels. As I left it is correct and recommended, that the name matches the rest of the languages ​​does not mean that they are omitted, that leaves the door open to add more languages ​​as you say.  Greetings and see you soon!
Adamant1 (2020-01-11 07:40:16+00:00): Hi there. I'm not 100% up on this exact area. Although I do explore the track roads around here sometimes. That said, I think something like "access=private" or a similar access tag might be more appropriate. As its not that motor vehicles can't use a lot of these, just that who can access them is restricted. A lot of times its permissive. 

These tracks roads where created by motor vehicles and they would have to go down them to repair the power lines etc. To me motor_vehicle=no is more meant for something confined to only none motor vehicle traffic. Like a foot path or stairs. 

You really should add an access tag to it anyway if your using motor_vehicle	no. As its sort of an "add-on" tag and not one meant to be used on its own. See the wiki article on the access tag for an example. 

Thanks
Brian Reavis (2020-01-11 08:52:19+00:00): These are non-motorized hiking trails (albeit roads) that are open to the general public, managed by the BLM (Sacramento River Bend Area). The official guide is here: https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/documents/files/media-center-public-room-california-sacramento-river-bend-area-guide.pdf

Setting access=private isn’t appropriate because this is public land and anyone can travel along these routes. Motor vehicle use is prohibited, however, which makes the motor_vehicle=no tag correct in this case.

The values for it are the same as the access tag, outlined here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access. For "no" it states: "No access for the general public. Consider using additional access (like foot=yes or bicycle=permissive, etc.) to indicate who can use the element. If only specific transport modes are forbidden, for example, at a vehicle no-entry sign, use a more specific restriction like vehicle=no or motor_vehicle=no over the general key access." This seems appropriate.

Further, it states: "access=yes, motor_vehicle=no means that all transport modes except motor vehicles can use the element." Setting an access tag when I really don't know the full access rules of these trails (are bikes allowed?) is not appropriate.

Thanks for the review!
Glassman (2020-01-11 06:21:33+00:00): Instead of layer=-1 (which would imply underground here) connect the sidewalk to the track. That allows routers to use both. 

Also sidewalks are tagged highway=footway + footway=sidewalk. We get our tagging from the British where OSM started.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/79441113
sanchi (2020-01-13 10:43:28+00:00): Hola

Te escribo porque estas poniendo todos los contenedores de basura sin distinguirlos de los de reciclaje.

Los de reciclaje hay que ponerlos como 
amenity=recycling
recycling_type=container
en vez de como amenity=waste_disposal

Y los de basuras normales sobra lo de 
recycling:organic=yes

Tienes mas información en 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:amenity=waste_disposal
y
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:amenity%3Drecycling

Si puedes corregirlo.

Saludos.
chnav (2020-01-11 09:22:33+00:00): Реклама. Удалено.
freebeer (2020-01-12 06:39:53+00:00): another buggy app, dumping things at null island?  should be reverted, i'm trying my best but don't mind if someone beats me to it
angys (2020-01-11 18:43:40+00:00): I suggest that your company editors use OpenStreetCam to record the roads.