piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
sovereign_ch (2020-07-29 06:52:36+00:00): Hi, lese ich das aus den GTFS-Daten richtig heraus, dass nach den Sommerferien (ab Mo 17. August 2020) Linien 305, 306 und 314 via Sommerau > Poststrasse > Bahnhofstrasse wenden und 303 in Dietikon entsprechend aufgetrennt wird? Grüsse
vbzbehrd (2020-07-29 12:30:26+00:00): Hi, sovereing_ch
sehr aufmerksam deine Beobachtung. 
Tatsächlich ist die nächste grössere Umstellung für den Bau der LTB am 17.08.2020. Daraus ergeben sich Umleitungen für die Linie 303, 305, 306, 311, 314, 325 und der Nachtbuslinie N30. Die ausfahrenden Fahrzeuge aus dem Reppischtal sind auch von den geplanten Massnahmen betroffen.

Freundliche Grüsse
vbzbehrd
Frans S (2020-09-08 11:58:31+00:00): 
Hello. 

Thank you for mapping on this project.
Your mapping should be more accurate and lacks the finishing touch of squaring them
Do not include the shadow of a building 
in your mapping. 
Most buildings here are rectangular. Please square each of them with the Q key in the editor

Here are some tips and hints which might be helpful to improve your mapping skills

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vT_4K-s7HItsGTDt4dx43C3iD7u5uHtUyvasd_eMUQIq9zWbwlMXQk90jDHcdq6OcOnMc6B1NHYG4cO/pub
Best regards and keep mapping
Jessica LaMasse (2020-07-28 12:43:48+00:00): #SA2020
Kovoschiz (2020-07-28 14:43:41+00:00): Mini-roundabouts being without physical separation isn't mapped separately
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/88621734
Free gems 8 (2020-07-28 15:55:23+00:00): ok
4004 (2020-07-30 21:16:53+00:00): у вас адрес в названии
SomeoneElse (2020-08-01 10:01:11+00:00): Hello again,
please use meaningful changeset comments, not just things like "Editing". Explain what changes you are making and why.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.
Akkurator (2020-08-20 11:49:37+00:00): Hallo OSMChecker,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/831235908
du hast hier einen Bach eingezeichnet, der in der Argen beginnt und anscheinend auch wieder in ihr endet (vermutliche eine "Umfahrung" für das Wehr https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/815460526), aber das Ende ist nicht mit der Argen verbunden.
War das Absicht?
Grüße,
Akkurator
PT-53 (2020-08-20 13:05:49+00:00): Hallo,
ist dort wirklich ein "Bach" oder ist dort eine Fischtreppe:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:waterway%3Dfish_pass

https://www.schwaebische.de/landkreis/landkreis-ravensburg/wangen_galerie,-fischtreppe-auf-wangener-argeninsel-ist-fertiggestellt-_galid,201068.html

Fragende Grüße
ChrisFromRV (2020-08-20 18:04:49+00:00): Sieht mehr wie ein Bach aus, ist aber schwer zu sagen. Es ist. ca. 3-5 Meter breit und scheint gleichmäßig tief zu sein.
Tengku Almira IRM-ED (2022-12-02 02:29:03+00:00): Hello div_priya

Thank you for mapping, there's nothing wrong with your mapping but I'm Sorry I deleted one node, so I can tie the connection between the two roads neatly

Best Regards and Happy Mapping
Frans S (2020-07-28 14:16:46+00:00): Hello Beza208. You asked for a review.
Your mappings are accurate and squared.
I see that you validated nearly all tasks here. 
Good Job.
Just 1 remark.  You overlooked a duplicated building.
Don't  you use the validation tool or the Scripting plugin to find duplicated and non squared buildings?
They should report it.
best regards
dgitto (2020-08-05 11:34:52+00:00): Benvenuto in OSM
Britzz (2020-07-28 17:33:12+00:00): Pourquoi ne pas mettre https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7734457287 en tant qu' "admin_centre" ?
bagage (2020-07-28 19:02:06+00:00): En fait sur d'autres commaunautés de communes, l'admin_centre est la commune "du siege social" (par exemple ici : https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/295954692).

Je suis parti du principe qu'avoir la ville "principale" en admin_centre était probablement plus logique qu'un batiment contenant l'EPCI (surtout qu'il peut y en avoir plusieurs) ? Mais je n'ai pas trouvé un autre type de role à assigner au bâtiment donc pour le moment c'est sans role...
Britzz (2020-07-28 19:12:30+00:00): Je pense que le bâtiment siège de l'interco est plus indiqué comme "admin_centre". Même si il y a plusieurs bâtiments, il y en aura toujours un d'équivalent à un hôtel de ville, là où est le bureau du Président, là où se réunit l'assemblée.
mavl (2020-07-28 13:30:23+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 59931670, 59934699, 59934873, 59934933, 59991505, 59991612, 59991696, 59991721, 59991753, 59991782, 59991830, 88448449, 88456681, 88457814, 88490649, 88490686, 88490783, 88499875, 88499955, 88499982, 88500010, 88500042, 88500075, 88500092, 88500127, 88500147, 88500161, 88500206, 88500268, 88500297, 88500309, 88500331.
GOwin (2021-03-03 02:07:01+00:00): Hi @jayson1225. Could you tell us the source of this barangay boundary you added?
user_5359 (2022-04-04 11:59:12+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/831249988. What is the meaning of Lelemaan = Barangay Boundary?

@GOwin: this is a last attempt to work out the source and correct keys with jayson1225. Otherwise we would have to deal with deleting the data.
GOwin (2022-04-05 01:29:20+00:00): @user_5359, my reading is that it's supposed to be the administrative boundary for the village, albeit with the wrong tags.

I was asking for a clarification, because I strongly suspect it came from a source incompatible with OSM.

It's been a year, without any response, so I wouldn't object to having it redacted.
marc__marc (2020-10-14 14:49:53+00:00): Bonjour,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/831252788
80 bandes de circulation, cela me semble beaucoup :)
Cordialement,
Marc
Furdrien (2020-10-14 14:57:10+00:00): Bonjour,
Oui 80 bandes de circulation, c'est une peu beaucoup, c'est une erreur de ma part !
Je corrige cela 
Bien à Vous et Bonne journée
ma-rt-in (2020-08-06 14:26:29+00:00): Hallo,
bitte nicht einfach Gebäude löschen, wenn diese noch auf Luftbildern zu sehen sind. Dafür gibt es wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix
Daher habe ich dein CS zurückgesetzt und entsprechend angepasst.

vg
Leo Slager (2020-07-28 23:39:50+00:00): Tja, ongetwijfeld zijn je bedoelingen goed.
Maar er lopen daar routerelaties (buslijn 7).
Door het samenvoegen van die wegen zijn die routes nu beschadigd geraakt.
TIP:  Nooit delen van wegen samenvoegen, tenzij je er van overtuigd hebt dat er geen wandel, fiets of OV-routes over die wegen lopen.
TIP aan de rechterzijde van je scherm kun je de fietskaartr of de transportkaart zichtbaar maken. Dan zie je gelijk of er routes lopen.
casiosmu (2020-07-30 15:15:20+00:00): Hallo, schön dass du seit kurzen wieder dabei bist.
Leider sind dir hier ein paar Fehler unterlaufen:
1. du hast den alten Platz gelöscht und komplett neu gezeichnet. Da damit aber der bisherige Bearbeitungsverlauf verloren geht, gilt das als keine gute Praxis. Besser immer das vorhandene Objekt anpassen.
2. der neue Umriss ist direkt die Baumgrenze vom Bing-Luftbild mit einem für einen Platz doch ungewöhnlichen Umriss. Bei so was besser mal vor Ort nachschauen und einen GPS-Track aufzeichnen, denn dieser Platz sieht eigentlich deutlich anders aus (bin Anwohner)!
3. Der Platz und dein neuer Punkt sind als "amenity=place_of_worship" getaggt, es ist aber eher ein historischer Gedenkplatz, kein religiöser Anbetungspunkt (siehe auch das Denkmal in der Mitte).
Damit andere auch nachhvollziehen können, woher du die Infos hast, ist es auch immer hilfreich, beim abschicken des Changesets mit source= die Quelle anzugeben.
Grüße,
Sebastian
belarus_member (2020-11-18 04:32:53+00:00): А правда в Творичевке татарское кладбище?
Ride Trail Map (2020-07-29 06:49:14+00:00): Die urspünglichen OSM-Daten im Bereich der Bergstation der Seilbahn sind offensichtlich falsch weil hier anscheinend der Weg neu angegelgt wurde. Die Daten wurde vor diesem Hintergrund korrigiert, das ist ja genau der Sinn von OSM statt sich auf amtliche (träge) Daten abstützen zu müssen.
Der Hinweis, dass die Änderungshinweise «obskur» sein sollen ist deplaziert zumal die Angaben der Realität entsprechen. Die Änderungen erfolgen aufgrund tatsächlich erfolgter Aufzeichnungen wie angegeben. Daran ist nichts obskur (=fragwürdig).
BAK365 (2020-07-29 11:05:56+00:00): Kommentar siehe hier https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/88517738
tekim (2020-08-01 16:18:01+00:00): I noticed you have been deleting "unofficial trails."  In OSM we map what is actually on the ground, whether it is "official" or not.
tekim (2020-08-07 15:38:09+00:00): Hi rbradt, Could you restore the "unofficial" trails that you have deleted, both in this change set as well as others? Or provide evidence that they really don't exist (not just that they are "unofficial")?  In this change set you cite "Bing" as a source, but trails do not always show up in overhead imagery such as Bing. In any event, at least one of the trails you deleted, e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/621543001, do show up on Bing, albeit rather faintly. In addition, the Strava Global Heatmap shows that people are travelling along the route of that trail. Finally, unless you have been to a specific location and looked for the trail in question, you should assume that the original mapper is correct, although you can always contract them and ask about their sources.

Trail data, whether the trails are official or not, are used by those who travel in the back country. Even if they are not travelling on those trails, they serve as a navigational reference.  These data are also used by search and rescue and other emergency response organizations.

If you have evidence that a trail is "unofficial", you can tag it as "informal=yes."  If you have evidence that the public is prohibited from using a trail, you can tag it as "access=no" 

Thanks,
Mike
rbradt (2020-08-10 20:29:56+00:00): The majority of the removed trails are illegally constructed and causing serious resource damage. They run straight downhill and have no drainage features, therefore they channel water and cause erosion. It is irresponsible to leave these in OSM as it increases environmental damage by encouraging use. These are a serious problem here.
Some of the trails simply do not exist and I don't know why they are here.Some may be a route someone took, then put in OSM, but they are not trails. This is like taking everything in Strava and making it a trail in OSM.
Bing must be a default source, as I never use Bing. I have made no changes without personal knowledge of the trail, area, or issues.
phidauex (2020-08-10 21:14:59+00:00): Hi folks, hope you don't mind another opinion. I've had to address issues like this a few times, and there are a lot of options for resolving them. In most cases I'm in favor of leaving the trails in place and simply tagging them correctly. However, I have enough wilderness management experience to know that sometimes a trail is just too attractive as a shortcut, and too damaging to the environment, and needs to be removed from the maps.

In those extreme cases I suggest leaving the geometry in place and changing the main tag to "disused:highway=path", then adding a note such as "note = These trails are closed for environmental restoration, please do not re-map despite visibility in the imagery."

That way the geometry is still there, and an extreme user like a SAR group can still look for all highways, regardless of the lifecycle prefix, but the majority of users will not see it anymore (I'm 99% sure that disused: suppresses rendering in Carto and the other major renderers, but that can be double-checked). The geometry also stays in OSM with the note, so a future well-intentioned mapper doesn't just add it back in again, defeating your efforts.

Would that be a palatable solution in this case?
rbradt (2020-08-11 00:43:02+00:00): I'm good with that for old tracks/trails that have existed in the past, but where use is now discouraged, if "disused" will remove them from general use. They are not illegal to use, but publication increases use and degradation.  

The illegally constructed trails are another issue. Increasingly, in the past few years, trails are being built that run straight downhill and have no drainage structures. The resulting erosion is pushing the users out of the existing "trail" and creating new parallel tracks with the same issues.

There are many tracks in Strava, particularly in Wilderness, that are just routes people have taken, not trails. I really want them to remain as unmapped routes, not mapped as trails. Once people see them on maps as trails, they will turn them into trails, without any consideration of drainage or sustainability. Far better for everyone to wander on their own route and spread out the impact.

Caltopo seems to get a lot of use around here and they tell me they pull their data directly from OSM and they won't change it. They tell me I have to change it myself in OSM.
tekim (2020-08-12 00:00:30+00:00): Hi rbradt,
I think you have a valid concern regarding resource damage.  I want to protect our public lands and natural areas as well.  Before any of us starts/resumes deleting/undeleting/obfuscating data that others have entered into OpenStreetMap, why not raise your general concern (data in OSM leads to damage to natural resources, even if the data accurately reflects what is on the ground) with the larger OSM community? I am sure you are not the first person to have this concern, and there are probably many in the community who will have ideas as to how to address the situation. I suggest this mailing list: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
(although there are many other channels through which to engage the community).

My view is that although there will be some downside to widely reporting accurate facts, the benefits of having open and transparent data outweigh these downsides in most cases.  Otherwise we could say that the media should never report horrific crimes, as they can lead to "copy cat" crimes. By the same token, data about the state of the economy shouldn't be published as bad economic news leads to worse economic conditions as people and companies stop spending money out of fear.  One exception in OSM is culturally sensitive sites. I think the consensus in OSM is not to map such sites in most cases.

Deleting accurate data because it is dangerous/injurious also seems a little like censorship - "Please only publish nice, safe, facts"  

Ironically, having talked to some of the users of these informal trails (not the trails you deleted in particular), I can say that these users are probably the most opposed to the publication of such data. Presumably as they know it could lead to the trails being shut down, or perhaps because they just don't want others people to show up?  If you are a land manager, why not use the data in OSM to target illegal trails for enforcement and restoration?  Its kind of like the DEA getting information about where drug deals are going to go down.

I wasn't suggesting that every bit of Strava Heatmap should be mapped in OSM as a trail, it just provides evidence that the original mapper of those trails didn't totally fabricate their existence.  Not conclusive proof, but some evidence.

Bing as a default source: I haven't used the iD editor in sometime, but I would think there would be a way to override it.  Perhaps it is automatically taking the sources from the imagery you have displayed?  In any event, if you have "surveyed" (OSM term for actual on the ground inspection of something) a trail or other feature, put that in your change set comment/source and possibly also in a note tag on the feature itself. Not a lot of mappers do this, but provides credence to your work and lets other mappers know that you are not just tracing from imagery or copying from another source.
Mike
mariotomo (2021-10-08 15:39:01+00:00): hola, porqué le quitaste el nombre "Río Abajo" a la quebrada? aquí la gente acostumbra llamar "río" a cualquier cosa en que corra agua.
Thierry1030 (2020-12-04 17:11:33+00:00): Pieter, wie of wat is "OP"? :-)
Pieter Vander Vennet (2020-12-04 17:14:26+00:00): "Original Poster", jargon van reddit voor degene die de post heeft gemaakt; in dit geval de maker van https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7739444413 en https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7739412151/history
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2020-08-02 15:55:02+00:00): Olá feliz, removi esta edição. não deve adicionar a etiqueta de barreira ao elemento linha, apenas a pontos. A barreira já se encontrava adicionada no mapa nesta edição https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3261877431/history
Nestes caso o procedimento correto, seria adicionar uma etiqueta de acesso restrito à estrada. 
Vou corrigir a edição, obrigado pelas suas edições
Leo Slager (2020-07-29 09:49:21+00:00): camping weer verwijderd van de kaart op grond van je eigen opmerking:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2283115#map=16/51.4546/4.9614
eggie (2020-07-28 19:30:32+00:00): Geen naam .. deze camping?
mueschel (2020-08-01 10:11:15+00:00): Hallo,
ist das 'Cafe Wagner' wirklich nur ein Geschäft oder fehlt da ein "amenity=cafe" tag?
gvSmartEnergy (2020-08-04 19:18:18+00:00): Es fehlt amenity=cafe, sorry falls ich den Tag falsch genannt hatte.
Frans S (2020-08-10 10:51:52+00:00): Hello RikeSeng
Please map from the Maxar imagery
See also my PM i've send you
Best regards
luisforte (2020-07-28 18:46:14+00:00): Boas
O recomendado para mapear places é um node, cf https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dhamlet .
Não me parece o mais correcto alterar o que está feito conforme recomendado para uma qq outra opção que pessoalmente nos pareça mais interessante ...
Luis
DUGA (2021-07-04 20:32:05+00:00): Please be careful with your edits. You created a lot of duplicate roads overlapping with the original ones.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/831291562#map=18/39.42326/-76.53207
Mateusz Konieczny (2020-07-28 22:10:22+00:00): Czemu skasowałeś poprawnie zmapowaną drogę?
user_4493657 (2020-07-30 11:30:14+00:00): Uznałem, że ewentualna nawigacja może doprowadzić zainteresowanego do posesji, ponieważ budynek z numerem znajduje się przy głównej drodze. Być może właściciel (o ile wypowiadała się osoba zarządzająca działką) mógł być zaskoczony obecnością na mapie drogi, której tak naprawdę nigdzie nie zgłaszał, a dojazd wyobrażał sobie w innym miejscu i formie. Napiszę nieskromnie, że chciałem też zamknąć kilka uwag w okolicy, a ta wydawała się względnie prosta w rozwiązaniu.
Mateusz dzięki, że trzymasz rękę na pulsie i przywróciłeś drogę. Pozdrawiam.
Jacques Lavignotte (2020-08-10 21:17:03+00:00): Bonjour Jrme,
au hasard de mes visites sur la carte je suis tombé sur vos contributions.
Merci de contribuer à OSM. J'essaye de faire au mieux de mon coté (ouest) de Poitiers.

Puis-je vous suggérer un petit ajout à Easy Cash ?  

shop=yes 

est juste mais 

shop=second_hand

serait encore mieux, tel qu'indiqué ici : 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:shop%3Dsecond_hand

Vous pouvez le mettre à jour 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/88125608#map=19/46.56490/0.36221
et revenir me voir, j'ai quelques autres suggestions.

Amicalement,
Jacques
Vinber-Pro (2020-07-29 09:01:49+00:00): Bonjour, dans les min_age et max_age, je ne pense pas opportun d'écrire year ou years ? à priori cela se renseigne juste avec un nombre d'années.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/88632006
Office du Tourisme Anglet 2 (2020-07-29 09:21:04+00:00): Bonjour, je modifie ça alors, merci !
DaveF (2020-08-06 16:55:25+00:00): Hi
What osmose setting flagged up that 'area' show be removed from:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/152107575 ?
spiregrain (2020-08-07 07:31:58+00:00): Looking back it it now, I think was was the rule that matches everything "indoor".  

https://github.com/osm-fr/osmose-backend/blob/master/plugins/TagFix_Area.py#L29

If you look at the indoor structures of Bank LUL station, they also are highlighted for area=yes removal - http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/#zoom=18&lat=51.513054&lon=-0.088181&item=3200&level=1%2C2%2C3&tags=&fixable=
DaveF (2020-08-07 11:54:08+00:00): Can you show me where it flags railway=platform?

Please don't remove any more as it was clearly an error.
spiregrain (2020-08-07 12:45:24+00:00): It doesn't flag railway=platform.  It flags  indoor=yes.
spiregrain (2020-08-07 12:50:44+00:00): (I think)
spiregrain (2020-08-07 12:57:13+00:00): Yes - it's the indoor what does it.  Now you've set it back to area=yes, it's triggered.

There is a green tag at the second link below - it says "Redundant area tagging Tags, `indoor`, already make this an area. ", it's connected to way 152107576.   The first link below shows more other bits of inscrutable metadata.

http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/error/c76368e1-3768-2170-b4dd-35a54e14184e

http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/#username=DaveF&zoom=18&lat=51.515731&lon=-0.098684&item=3200&level=1%2C2%2C3&tags=&fixable=
InfosReseaux (2020-07-29 22:01:41+00:00): Bonsoir Sigo,

Je crois qu'une erreur s'est glissé dans ce changeset. La ligne https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/831302926 semble dupliquée.

Est-ce possible de corriger s'il vous plait ?
Merci par avance
François
Sigo (2020-07-30 06:09:19+00:00): Bonjour François,
J'ai corrigé l'erreur en supprimant les lignes dupliquées. J'ai dû faire un copier-coller malencontreux. Ce que je ne comprends pas, c'est que le validateur de JOSM aurait dû me le signaler. Bizarre.
Merci d'avoir repéré l'erreur.
InfosReseaux (2020-07-30 21:30:52+00:00): Bonsoir Sigo

Merci d'avoir supprimé ces lignes.
Je ne suis pas sûr que JOSM puisse le signaler.

Ces lignes semblaient importées depuis l'opendata Enedis n'est-ce pas ?
C'est un bon début. Quelque chose qui aiderait encore plus, bien que beaucoup plus fastidieux, serait de recaler les poteaux à l'aide des vues aériennes, indiquer operator=Enedis et le matériau de chaque poteau.
C'est à construire sur le long terme, j'en ajoute régulièrement dans mon coin

Bonne soirée
François
eggie (2020-08-02 07:47:19+00:00): grade5 betekent nauwelijks zichtbaar in het landschap. De vraag is of dit zo is?
grade3 impliceert al unpaved. 
Welke fietsrouteplanner routeert hier over grade3 met de instelling onverhard vermijden?
Gr eggie
eggie (2020-08-02 07:49:41+00:00): reverted by #88832164
Frans S (2020-09-09 14:01:09+00:00): Hello. 

Thank you for mapping on this project.
I am sorry to say but your mappings should be more accurate and lacks the finishing touch of squaring them

Most buildings here have a rectangular pattern. Please follow the outlines precisely and square each of them with the Q key in the editor

Here are some tips and hints which might be helpful to improve your mapping skills

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vT_4K-s7HItsGTDt4dx43C3iD7u5uHtUyvasd_eMUQIq9zWbwlMXQk90jDHcdq6OcOnMc6B1NHYG4cO/pub
Best regards and keep mapping
eggie (2020-08-02 06:49:00+00:00): Dag gnomeo.. probeer je svp goed in te lezen hoe te mappen. We voegen niet nogmaals het adres toe aan gebouwen. er is al een adresnode. 
Het buurthuis kan prima zo.. Zou ook op de adresnode kunnen. 
Ook heb je adresnode 98 toegevoegd op een node , maar dat nummer hoort bij de Goede Herderschool.
Ik zal wat aanpassen.
MVG,
eggie
eggie (2020-08-02 06:52:20+00:00): Adressen hebben een bepaalde format. Die zijn al geïmporteerd. we raggen dus bij op de bestaande adresnodes.
een addr:street ="Zeeweg 98" kan dus nooit correct zijn.
.. en is ook niet vindbaar.
De school zal ik ook herstellen. Kijk maar eens wat ik er van gemaakt heb,
Gr eggie
eggie (2020-08-02 06:54:58+00:00): dubbele tagging verwijderd. info samengevoegd met adresnode
Het buurthuis was al correct door jou op de adresnode gemapt.
OSM-edytor (2020-07-29 21:38:48+00:00): road does not exist
OSM-edytor (2020-07-29 21:40:01+00:00): road does not exist