piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
mavl (2017-10-20 15:04:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53098778 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44417818].
user_5359 (2017-01-04 18:21:22+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
user_5359 (2017-01-04 18:21:27+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
py_berrard (2016-12-16 08:39:35+00:00): Merci pour l'import.
Ne pas oublier de mentionner la source : Direction Générale des Finances Publiques - Cadastre. Mise à jour : 2016
user_5359 (2017-01-04 18:21:33+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
user_5359 (2017-01-04 18:21:37+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
mavl (2017-10-20 15:03:56+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53098778 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44417818].
mavl (2017-10-20 15:03:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53098778 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44417818].
nevw (2016-12-22 06:04:01+00:00): use ele=1380 to tag elevation and not the name tag
majkaz (2016-12-16 07:35:19+00:00): Vlastní revert - test maps.me
user_5359 (2017-01-04 18:21:42+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
Polarbear (2016-12-16 17:58:51+00:00): Hi Nordpfeil, 

I wonder why you upload each building in an individual changeset? JOSM allows you to do a number of changes in a particular project, such as drawing all buildings in a quarter, or adding all addresses in a street, and upload that at once. 

Thus your contributions are better to recognise and peer-review, and create less load for the databases. 

Finally you could give more meaningful changeset comments. 

Also, please do not add source tags to individual objects, such as "HiRes aerial imagery", it is enough to do so in the changeset source field. 

In this case, the building ring was drawn already, so adding the address was certainly not sourced from aerial image?
Nordpfeil (2016-12-16 21:34:34+00:00): You are right. I wonder where this "HiRes aerial imagery" is coming from. That makes no sence. I thought that was added with the building shape, but it wasn't. I didn't add it intentionally.
user_5359 (2017-01-04 18:21:46+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
mavl (2017-10-20 15:04:04+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53098778 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44417818].
mavl (2017-10-20 15:04:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53098778 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44417818].
user_5359 (2017-01-04 18:21:50+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
anu_bala (2019-04-05 04:18:57+00:00): "Hi Benjidad,

Trust you are well. While reviewing the road network in Aceh, I have come across 
""way 459981784
way 459981782
way 4599817830"" classified as 'Tertiary'. However, going by the aerial imagery and other ways around,these seems to be Unclassified. and
"way 459981780
way 459981545
way 459981416" are classified as "Track" but seems like "Residential". 

Please look into this and share your thoughts on this.

Thanks in advance."
Basstoelpel (2017-02-24 19:44:17+00:00): Hallo map55,

Du solltest vielleicht auf einen aktuelleren editor wechseln, der nicht dazu verleitet, an jeder Solaranlage das seit über einem halben Jahrzehnt veraltete power_source=photovoltaic zu ergänzen.

Gruß,

Baßtölpel
Polarbear (2016-12-16 18:14:43+00:00): Hi Geomir,
I wonder why you upload each building in an individual changeset? It would be better if you keep a number of changes in a particular project together, such as drawing all buildings in a quarter, and upload that at once.

Thus your contributions are better to recognise and peer-review, and create less load for the databases.

Finally you could give more meaningful changeset comments.
geomir (2017-04-07 13:45:37+00:00): Hi
Part of my editions have made changeset to Blocks of more than 500 buildings, I have also saved many of them individually. Thanks for the tip.
alphensebezorger (2016-12-17 14:51:42+00:00): Waarom is de weg getagged met motor_vehicle=permissive? Ik zou denken aan agricultural=yes.
Supaplex (2016-12-24 09:34:36+00:00): 恭喜您透過 Maps.Me 完成第一次的地圖編輯！ 歡迎加入開放街圖，群眾共同參與，繪製生活週遭大家關心事物的共編地圖。Maps.Me App 採用開放街圖的地理資料，由社群而非商業公司建置的地理資料庫。以下是相關的參考資料，歡迎隨時指教與提問。

編輯須知
台灣的標示依循準則可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Taiwan
常見的圖徵標示方式可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hant:Map_Features

由於Maps.Me隨著軟體更新更新最新地圖，App裡的地圖資料版本可能略舊，透過Maps.Me增添商家等資料時有可能開放街圖上已經有了，請到http://www.osm.org 網站看是否要加的商家有沒有人加上去了。

台灣社群網站
台灣 OpenStreetMap 網站 http://www.openstreetmap.tw
臉書粉絲頁OpenStreetMap台灣 https://www.facebook.com/opestreetmaptaiwan/
台灣社群Facebook社團 https://www.facebook.com/groups/OpenStreetMap.TW/
郵件論壇 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tw
Slack https://osm-tw.signup.team/

Happy Mapping!
BCNorwich (2016-12-17 21:02:02+00:00): Hello There, I think you may be mistaken regarding the existence of this path. There is a faint path that can be seen on the Bing image from the end of the track. (Certainly the track section ought not be deleted.) The mapper uploaded a gpx trace for the whole route. Starting from the car park going west to near the coast then north as it was mapped. The gpx trace then goes over the hills and back south to their start.
They tagged the path as :- sac_scale=demanding_mountain_hiking and 
trail_visibility=intermediate Thus indicating that the way would be difficult to discern.
These are the sought of paths I seek out when up north and in my humble opinion the way should be left on the map. Even if hard to find it poses no problem to the map tagged as it is to show the way may be difficult to follow.
rarad74 (2016-12-16 17:25:36+00:00): Please do not put numbers in a wrong way again. Housenumber does not contain ()
SammysHP (2016-12-16 10:49:21+00:00): Moin Nordpfeil,
 
vermutlich nutzt du die Option "jedes Objekt einzeln hochladen" in JOSM. Das macht die ganze Sache leider etwas unübersichtlich. Besser wäre es, wenn du alle zusammengehörigen Änderungen (z.B. alle Adresskorrekturen) ein einem Changeset hochlädst.
 
Apropos Adresskorrekturen: Durch die vielen hundert Changesets fehlt mir der Überblick, wo du überall Objekte geändert hast. Du schreibst überall als Quelle "own investigation", prinzipiell würde ich bei diesen Änderungen aber eher von einem mechanischen Edit ausgehen: Du lädst eine Region herunter, wählst alle Adressen aus und ergänzt die fehlenden Werte. Das ist nicht ganz Sinn der Sache. Zum einen liegen die Infos meist schon in Form von Grenzrelationen redundant vor, zum anderen täuscht es Korrektheit vor. Denn ich glaube nicht, dass du jedes Objekt einzeln kontrolliert hast. Dann hättest du nämlich auch gleich offensichtlich falsche Lage (POI liegt 20m außerhalb des Gebäudes auf der Straße) korrigieren können.
 
Über eine kurze Antwort und zukünftigen Verzicht auf "einzeln hochladen" würde ich mich freuen.
 
Viele Grüße
Sven
Nordpfeil (2016-12-16 21:48:35+00:00): Danke für Deine Einschätzungen und Anregungen.
mueschel (2016-12-21 11:56:11+00:00): Hi & welcome to OSM,

I found many uncommon tags on your edits, like here:
http://osm.org/way/460001598
  Gender of owner = Female
  Type of ownership = Unknown
  building type = Commercial
  building-status = Complete
  building_material = Concrete Blocks
  water_supply = From house with piped water nearby
  who stays here = Tenant

These tags might describe the building, but they can not be used by any automated software because they are not defined. Please have a look to the Wiki and read about common tags for buildings.

Jan
user_5359 (2017-01-04 18:21:54+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
MrYadro (2016-12-16 11:04:04+00:00): 44444444
de vries (2016-12-17 14:29:53+00:00): check 'em
user_5359 (2017-01-04 18:22:19+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
pitscheplatsch (2016-12-16 16:15:14+00:00): Hi montser, welcome to OSM. May I know the reason behind deleting the mapped areas in this changeset. See http://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=44444653
mavl (2019-01-13 17:18:28+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
user_5359 (2017-01-04 18:22:24+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
Goffredo (2016-12-16 20:09:47+00:00): Ciao Thomas, ma a me non risulta che esista questo raccordo tra la A35-RAC e la A4. Puoi fornire qualche informazione?
Thomasmetal (2016-12-20 09:55:04+00:00): Ciao, è fin fase di realizzazione per la primavera del 2017 da quel che so
Goffredo (2016-12-21 19:50:49+00:00): Ciao e grazie per la risposta. Però, permettimi una annotazione: se una strada è solo proposta, esiste l'accoppiata di tags highway=proposed + proposed=tipo_di_highway. E cosa importante è di non modificare la situazione reale finché rimane tale. Il motivo (ovvio) è che i dati OSM sono usati da navigatori etc... dunque è bene che rispecchino la situazione reale.
Grazie per la disponibilità, buon mapping e buone feste.
user_5359 (2017-01-05 07:29:26+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
pitscheplatsch (2016-12-16 16:00:06+00:00): Hi ATRÍCIA ANICETO, welcome to OSM. May I know the reason behind deleting several ways in this changeset. See http://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=44445186
ViriatoLusitano (2016-12-19 22:59:54+00:00): Feels like jfh_paris18 moved a point away, saved, and PATRÍCIA ANICETO tried to clean his mistake, but removed some good ways too.
user_5359 (2017-01-05 07:29:32+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
trigpoint (2016-12-16 16:58:12+00:00): Please can you make meaningful comments, this is OSM not twitter and London rather than Tanzania.
mrlourobinson (2016-12-16 17:01:18+00:00): Apologies, I didnt realise it had added that comment. Seems to have kept the comment from a previous change for Missing Maps. I'll be careful it doesn't happen again.
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-05-08 07:57:11+00:00): What you tried to map here using this springs?
Superadlen (2023-05-12 22:07:29+00:00): ??????
mavl (2017-10-20 15:04:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53098778 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44417818].
user_5359 (2017-01-05 07:29:38+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
mavl (2019-01-13 17:18:24+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
*Martin* (2016-12-16 16:47:27+00:00): Operator je nadalej "Fresh"?
mavl (2017-10-20 15:04:10+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53098778 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44417818].
Yorvik Prestigitator (2016-12-17 02:05:22+00:00): Are you sure about this location, this is a grassy area with trees across the road from where the carriage works was, there are no shops here.
The shops on Poppleton road are either near where it joins Holgate Road or up the hill to the Water end junction.
Yorvik Prestigitator (2016-12-17 02:05:49+00:00): Do you have a name for this shop?
naoliv (2016-12-18 17:20:10+00:00): Hélvio, por favor, evite fazer testes no mapa.
Também é necessário discutir com a comunidade caso pretenda fazer algum tipo de importação.
AsgerFrank (2016-12-16 15:31:34+00:00): På det luftfoto fra GST ligner det stadig en 3 m bred nyasfalteret cykelsti; også i lyset af history må der næsten være en source i tillæg til det, hvis den kan klassificeres som en alm vej uklassificeret, som så også må have et navn (og en kilde til det).  
Hvad med et gæt, at der er bygget en asfalteret cykelsti løbende ved siden af en stadig eksisterende grusvej Glisholmvej, eller så er grusvejen nedlagt. Det ville være lettere at afklare hvis korttegnerne skriver fx om det har været der og set det, eller hvor de har det fra (source).
AsgerFrank (2016-12-16 21:19:24+00:00): Jeg har sat en bemærkningsmarkør på kortet, for hvis nu der er andre der også kan bidrage.
Polarbear (2018-01-14 21:27:13+00:00): Hi, highway=traffic_signals ist für Ampeln, die den Fahrzeugverkehr aus mehreren Richtungen regulieren. 
Hier handelt es sich aber um einen beampelten Fussgängerübergang, also highway=crossing vom Typ crossing=traffic_signals. 
Ist gefixt.
RoterEmil (2018-01-14 21:58:17+00:00): Hi Polarbear, von "gefixt" kann m.E. hier nicht die Rede sein. Aus dem wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway=traffic_signals): "Bei einfachen Fußgängerampeln kann die selbe Node gleichzeitig mit highway=traffic_signals und crossing=traffic_signals gekennzeichnet werden." Ich halte das auch für den logisch richtigen Weg, da sonst für den Fahrzeugverkehr hier nun keine Ampel (hw=traffic_signals) existiert. Du hättest also wenigstens jeweils vor und nach der Fußgängerampel ein hw=traffic_signals + traffic_signals:direction=forward/backward ergänzen müssen!

Ich kann also Deinen Einwand überhaupt nicht verstehen. Es ist im übrigen so wie ich es gemacht habe, sehr weit bei OSM verbreitet.

Des weiteren und unabhängig davon habe auch ich schon immer mal wieder kleinere Fehler, Unstimmigkeiten, etc. von Dir gefunden. Das ist ja auch ganz klar, z.B. weil jeder mal unaufmerksam ist. Deshalb habe ich aber nicht gleich Deinen Änderungssatz diskutiert. Es ist natürlich Dein gutes Recht, meine Änderungssätze zu diskutieren. Ich empfände es aber als angenehmeren Stil, wenn Du es entweder einfach änderst (wenn es Kleinigkeiten, offensichliche Vertipper o.ä. sind und dahinter offenbar kein "falsches Tagging-System" besteht) und Du Dir sicher bist, dass Du es richtig stellst oder mir eine kurze PN schickst, da wir uns ja sogar persönlich schon getroffen haben und voneinander wissen, dass wir in guter Absicht an OSM mitarbeiten. CS-Diskussionen haben bei Mappern, denen man eigentlich zwischenmenschlich vertrauen könnte, für mich immer ein 'Geschmäckle'. Aber das nur mal am Rande...

Auf weiterhin gute Zusammenarbeit und schöne Grüße :)
RoterEmil (2018-01-18 12:38:45+00:00): Hi, wie schaut's aus? Habe ich etwas übersehen oder sollte/kann die Ampel wieder in den vorigen Zustand gebracht werden?

Danke für Deine Antwort, schönen Tag Dir :)
mavl (2017-10-20 15:04:06+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53098778 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44417818].
user_5359 (2017-01-05 07:29:44+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
mavl (2019-01-13 17:18:32+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
trigpoint (2016-12-16 14:53:48+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM. Little Venice is already mapped a short distance from there. I have removed this node as it could mislead other map users.
DGerveno (2016-12-19 17:22:58+00:00): No deben incluirse restricciones de acceso que ya existen por defecto en una vía.
mavl (2017-10-20 15:04:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53098778 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44417818].
mavl (2019-01-13 17:18:35+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
Nakaner-repair (2016-12-18 18:14:42+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 44497377 where the changeset comment is: Revert undiscussed low-quality import of some shape files (protected areas) without discussion. Import must follow the guidelines. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines
naoliv (2016-12-18 18:14:07+00:00): Jessica, por favor, não importe dados dessa maneira. Discuta as importações com a comunidade antes de inserir os dados no OSM.
Nakaner (2016-12-16 21:06:53+00:00): Hi AlineIshikawa,

this changeset seems to be an import. Did you discuss this import according to the guidelines? Where is the documentation of this import at the OSM wiki? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines

Please do not upload further OSM objects whose sources are shape files.

Best regards

Michael
naoliv (2016-12-18 17:53:06+00:00): Aline, por favor. Não importe dados dessa maneira sem antes discutir com o resto da comunidade.
@Nakaner thanks for spotting this
Nakaner-repair (2016-12-18 18:14:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 44497377 where the changeset comment is: Revert undiscussed low-quality import of some shape files (protected areas) without discussion. Import must follow the guidelines. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines
AlineIshikawa (2016-12-19 14:53:40+00:00): Hi people! Sorry for uploading without the discussion with the group.
Thanks for the messages and the tips. 
I was in a course, where I learned about OSM. I will delete the shapefile and I'll take appropriate action.

Thanks and sorry. 

Aline
AlineIshikawa (2016-12-19 15:10:03+00:00): Oh, I just saw that you deleted it.
Thanks.
mavl (2019-01-13 17:18:38+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
mavl (2017-10-20 15:03:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53098778 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44417818].
ivanbranco (2021-12-08 09:44:54+00:00): Ciao datamove, hai cambiato il nome della via da Via Vittorio Bachelet a Via Damiano Bachelet, ti ricordi quale fosse la fonte? Ho fatto una ricerca sul sito del comune di Brugherio e anche nel notiziario comunale (pagina 14) fanno riferimento a "Via Vittorio Bachelet": https://www.comune.brugherio.mb.it/export/sites/default/documenti/Notiziario-Comunale/2011/Notiziario_luglio_2011.pdf
mavl (2019-01-13 17:18:42+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
mavl (2019-01-13 17:18:46+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
mavl (2019-01-13 17:18:49+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
mavl (2019-01-13 17:18:52+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
DGerveno (2016-12-16 17:04:52+00:00): Por favor, documenta correctamente las ediciones que realices, no llames "infraestructura" a todas ellas.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Spain/Buenas_pr%C3%A1cticas#Edici.C3.B3n

Un saludo
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-05-02 15:59:16+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4557183130/history has 俗名 = 坟前 that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)
What you intended to express by using this unusual key? Is this tag needed?
Or maybe can it be expressed in a more typical way that would be easier to understand?
Or maybe this key can and should be documented as useful tagging schema?
DGerveno (2016-12-16 17:04:46+00:00): Por favor, documenta correctamente las ediciones que realices, no llames "infraestructura" a todas ellas.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Spain/Buenas_pr%C3%A1cticas#Edici.C3.B3n

Un saludo