piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Strubbl (2022-01-04 17:50:50+00:00): park area was added for one tree
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115517225
eggie (2021-12-30 07:52:12+00:00): Dag Sandarr Langs de Elly Takmastraat  bevinden geen parallelfietspaden. Ik heb deze weer aangepast naar fietsstrook.
cycleway:both=lane
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycleway%3Dlane

MVG
eggie
confusedbuffalo (2023-12-27 10:35:43+00:00): You may want to review the use of access:delivery=no on
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/292217732 now that I have updated the access tagging
rababdul (2023-12-29 12:16:34+00:00): Hello,

Thank you for looking into the change set. We have added access:delivery=no tag based on the driver feedback. We have started adding this tag based on OSM community suggestion. If you are local or going to survey this location please make the appropriate changes or let us know, we would be happy to update the map. For further information, kindly go through this diary post: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/jguthula/diary/392437.  

Thanks and Regards,
rababdul
confusedbuffalo (2023-12-30 11:47:58+00:00): I have surveyed the location and added conditional access tagging, as anyone can go through at certain times, and no-one (other than emergency services and those with permits) at other times. So I think access:delivery=no is wrong
rababdul (2024-01-05 07:37:42+00:00): Hello,

Thank you for your feedback. We have removed the "access:delivery=no" tag from the gate in the changeset (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145909140).

Regards,
Abdul Qader
archie (2021-12-29 13:16:57+00:00): Åter igen. Detta är en dubbeltaggning (namnet finns redan på relationen) som strider mot principen "one feature, one osm-element". se även: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element samt https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Waterways/River_modernization#Named_River_Areas
Swedneck (2022-02-14 10:58:14+00:00): Då jag nyligen har blivit informerad att denna dubbeltaggning *inte* strider mot principen "one feature, one element" (wikin talar om att man inte ska ha namnet på både arean och linjen), så kommer jag att återinföra namnet på linjen.

Jag har pratat med Mateusz Konieczny på OSM-discorden som informerade mig om detta och försäkrade mig om att namnet SKA finnas på både relationen och linjen.
hemakhan (2021-12-29 13:00:26+00:00): Cute Call Girls Dubai 0569341582 Indian Call Girls in Dubai, Indian Call Girls in Dubai, Abu Dhabi Call Girls, AJman call girls, dubai call girls, fujairah call girls, ras al khaimah call girls, rak call girls, sharjah call girls, Russian call girls in dubai, pakistani call girls in dubai, european call girls in dubai, call girls in abu dhabi, call girls in ajman, call girls in sharjah, call girls in ras al khaimah, call girls in fujairah,
woodpeck (2021-12-29 13:31:24+00:00): Hallo SWF8, bitte gibt bei Deinen Changesets einen sinnvollen Kommentar ein (z.B. "Operator ÖBB hinzugefügt") und spezifiziere auch die Quelle dieser Information. Danke!
maraf24 (2022-01-03 19:14:00+00:00): Po co degradowałeś Mrozowską?
Mammi71 (2022-08-10 19:52:48+00:00): Hallo Smotti, nein, das sind keine "Auffahrten". Wenn eine primary in eine trunk übergeht, braucht es keine trunk_link
user_5359 (2021-12-30 12:02:03+00:00): Hallo! Bitte schau Dir nochmal https://www.osm.org/way/643205306/history an. Was ist die Bedeutung von layer2q1=1?
Ingbife (2021-12-30 17:56:33+00:00): Scheint ein versehen zu sein.
Sorry hab es entfernt
segubi (2022-08-06 01:01:41+00:00): Bei der Änderung Bokeler Straße/Ernteweg ist die Reihenfolge der Elemente in den dort laufenden Routen durcheinander geraten. Bitte möglichst darauf achten (wobei ich das in iD auch nicht hinbekommen würde und daher JOSM benutze). Ich korrigiere das gerade.
abrensch (2022-01-07 13:26:48+00:00): Hallo reka16

ich kann zu diesem Einfahrtsverbot in die Wipertystrasse nichts finden:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13611173

Aber aktuelles Mappilary, was die Einfahrt zeigt:

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=416233439937313&focus=photo&lat=51.786805999999984&lng=11.134091000000126&z=17

Kannst Du mal schauen und ggf. die Dauer der Sperrung nennen?

Danke und Gruss, Arndt
osm-user12 (2022-01-07 16:35:27+00:00): Das war ein Fehler meinerseits. Sorry und besten Dank fürs Mitdenken und den Hinweis. Ich ändere es sofort.
osm-user12 (2022-01-07 16:48:09+00:00): es liegen aktuell keine Sperrungen dort vor. Du kannst gern vor diesem Hintergrund die anderen Abbiege Restriktionen auf Korrektheit und Sinn überprüfen. Wenn sie nicht notwendig sind (auch wenn sie keinen Fehler bedeuten), können sie raus.
Layft Greater (2022-03-28 12:56:22+00:00): There was a small mistake. I corrected it. Now it looks good.

Role should have been "outer" instead of "outline".

This is it! Good Job!
Layft Greater (2022-03-28 12:58:52+00:00): Actually, relation role was correct. Reverted
maraf24 (2022-01-04 08:57:54+00:00): Droga w budowie przecina istniejące budynki.
kubahahaha (2022-01-04 09:46:49+00:00): To błąd?
Yunkers (2022-01-04 12:00:23+00:00): Tak, tag construction oznacza aktywny plac budowy, więc w danym miejscu może być albo budynek albo budowa - nie ma innej opcji.
Od siebie jeszcze dodam, że rondo przy Łowińskiego-Kocmyrzowskiej ma złą kategorię (pomijając fakt że nic się tam na razie nie dzieje).
kubahahaha (2022-01-04 12:40:33+00:00): Z jakiegoś powodu przeczytałem drogi,a nie budynki. Faktycznie, pewnie jest zły przebieg. Ktoś ma doświadczenie w poprawianiu tego? 

Jeśli ktoś uzna że lepiej wycofać zmianę to się nie obrażę 

Odcinek do łącznika S7-S52 można chyba w ogóle zmienić w takim razie na proposed, w mieście większa szansa na regularne aktualizacje
maraf24 (2022-01-04 14:14:30+00:00): Albo zły przebieg albo budynek wyburzony. Albo czeka na wyburzenie.
Trudno powiedzieć bez Sentinela:)
NieWnen (2021-12-31 19:12:56+00:00): Dlaczego adres został usunięty razem z budynkiem? Wg. e-mapy nadal istnieje.

+ proszę nazywaj lepiej swoje zestawy zmian "aktualizacja" nic nie mówi.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian
cyberatlas (2023-07-24 16:15:46+00:00): Ten budynek został już wyburzony
maraf24 (2022-01-30 23:14:35+00:00): Wycofane w https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/115520958
user_5359 (2021-12-30 11:52:40+00:00): Hello! Please use building insetad of builing.
Lokai (2022-01-01 09:49:24+00:00): Hallo brah22,

bei den Toiletten hast du amenity inherhalb amenity kartiert, ich habe deine tags an das Gebäude geheftet.
pitscheplatsch (2022-01-01 12:59:21+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.

Just a test or what's the source of your mapping activity? Thanks.

---
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspicious
seancmd (2022-01-02 02:12:32+00:00): Bing satellite imagery and visiting the site.
cquest (2022-01-23 10:48:05+00:00): Bonjour

Sur https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6838799409/history

il n'est pas nécessaire ici d'indiquer ces règles d'accès, le type de voie "autoroute" sur lequel se trouve ce péage est déjà par défaut restreint au véhicules à moteur... sauf si les règles sont particulières ce qui ne semble pas être le cas.

Bonnes contributions !
StefanHRT (2021-12-29 14:20:04+00:00): Hallo Weltenschummler,
Dann mach dich bitte mit dem Gesetz der Geschützten Grünanlagen vertraut. der Weg hat keine beschilderte Radfreigabe, somit verboten ;) VG
Dodko (2022-03-05 18:36:40+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9376366620/history

Už pribudla budova v katastri tak som ju pridal
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1037396512
sebarnaud (2021-12-30 16:14:44+00:00): Bonjour,
En France il ne faut pas saisir les attributs addr:city et addr:postcode sur des chemins/points. Ils n'apportent aucune information car ils peuvent être extraient des limites administratives (ex : https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/79736 )

Dans ce cas là il s'agit des maisons, ex : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/111405793

Merci de corriger pour ces 17 chemins.
ottwiz (2021-12-29 14:11:23+00:00): For some reason a long power line was modified hence the changeset size is big
syntex (2021-12-29 14:36:21+00:00): Dzięki!
eggie (2021-12-29 15:16:25+00:00): Dag Frank.. Je vraagt om feedback. Lijkt me oke. Je zou de paaltjes ook kunnen toevoegen met barrier=bollard op een punt verbonden met het pad. 
MVG
eggie
user_5359 (2021-12-30 12:15:47+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/902592878. There is unusally character code on name:purr💅 We use the ISO 639-1 code (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Language-specific_Names), a 2 lowercase characters shortcut.
ivanbranco (2022-02-09 16:29:47+00:00): Since the user is still active and didn't reply in one month I deleted the tag. Feel free to add it again with proper tagging.
eggie (2021-12-29 15:20:27+00:00): Dag JDekk
Je vraagt feedback.. 
Lijkt me oke zo.. Ik heb mbv de laatste luchtfoto 2021 de toegangsweg doorgetrokken met access=private als extra tag. 
MVG
eggie
eggie (2021-12-29 15:23:08+00:00): Frank, 
Lijkt me oke zo..
Gr eggie
eggie (2021-12-29 15:27:48+00:00): Dag Catootje..
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=115523138

De specificatie construction=apartments kun je verwijderen (Er wordt immers niet meer gebouwd) en achter building 'moet' staat apartments ipv yes. 
Het woonerf zou je ook nog een straatnaam kunnen geven. 

MVG
eggie
eggie (2021-12-29 15:29:20+00:00): De wegen op de parkeerplaats zullen denk ik ook nog een accesstags behoeven.
mariotomo (2021-12-29 20:16:33+00:00): Hola Gmartinezh, gracias por entrar en OSM y mejorar la información presente.  No estoy seguro entender el comentario, mi idioma nativo no es el castellano, ojalá quieran entrar en el grupo Telegram https://t.me/Comunidad_OSM_Panama o empezar un hilo sobre el tema "Contadora" en el foro https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=61
mariotomo (2021-12-29 20:21:30+00:00): sugerencia: los comentarios a los conjuntos de cambios no son tanto el lugar para hacerse propaganda sino para explicar qué mejoró uno, en la forma "sujeto, verbo, objeto, detalles". está muy bien haber puesto los horarios de abertura! para las otras etiquetas relevantes, consulten el wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:amenity%3Dbar
BCNorwich (2021-12-30 08:09:59+00:00): Hi, There's no need to create a multipolygon here nor to add a POI to a single-use building. It only bloats the database with duplicated/triplicated information.  Please see one feature tagging information here:- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element. 

I've amended the church feature adding a few more details.  

Regards Bernard.
NavStar0 (2021-12-30 15:05:09+00:00): My bad again, thank you for the help anyways.
BCNorwich (2021-12-30 15:15:29+00:00): Hi, Absolutely no trouble at all, in fact, I'm pleased to have been able to help. You've learned so you've done nothing wrong. 

All the Best, Bernard.
mueschel (2022-01-01 18:41:26+00:00): Hi,
could you check these trees? They got a strange "idemplacement" tag.
Britzz (2022-01-01 21:34:17+00:00): You're right, i forgot to remove this key ; it's fixed now (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/115651841),
Happy 2022 year :-)
Duja (2022-01-05 13:01:52+00:00): I šta sad da ja krenem u laganu šetnju tvojim stazama i posle mora Gorska služba da me spasava? :)

Šta pokušavaš da uradiš?
mpele (2022-01-05 14:18:58+00:00): https://openstreetmap.rs/prilagodjen-server-za-generisanje-mapa/
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-02-04 05:20:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 116986772, 116973878, 116976578, 116979036, 116983082, 116959113, 116985873, 116987926, 116984402, 116970935, 116981234, 116967980 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint to the DWG, reverting some fantasy mapping.  Attempts to contact the mapper failed.  See https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=14729412 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5642 .
mosstreet (2021-12-31 12:41:19+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Tag:building%3Dchurch
ivanbranco (2021-12-29 16:06:52+00:00): What about "no undiscussed reverts just because you think you are right and other people are wrong"?
SomeoneElse (2021-12-29 16:23:40+00:00): The car park that was at https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1eC9 has been changed to sixe street-side parking areas such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/362953230 , but I'm not sure that either is correct - the western part looks like street-side parking but the eastern part around the parking aisle looks like a surface card park?
ivanbranco (2021-12-29 17:02:11+00:00): I believe you are right SomeoneElse. That western part was a mistake of mine. About the eastern part: "A parking aisle is a service road that passes between one or two rows of parking spaces (amenity=parking_space) in a parking lot". It's the case of this eastern parking and also of this one Martino recently edited in Vatican City in this CS: changeset/115515754

I just would like to avoid to convert any parking=surface to many parking=street_side (such as it was here https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1014378497 ecc.ecc.)
ivanbranco (2021-12-29 20:07:41+00:00): And yet you continue deleting parking=surface while a discussion is on going, I'm speechless. 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1014086682
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1014378507/history

ecc.ecc.
user_10901495 (2021-12-29 21:34:50+00:00): You literally created these parkings while a discussion was on-going
user_10901495 (2021-12-29 21:35:23+00:00): I should be speechless
user_10901495 (2021-12-29 21:36:32+00:00): those* on going*
user_10901495 (2021-12-29 21:37:17+00:00): And I didn't read these messages until now
user_10901495 (2021-12-29 21:37:57+00:00): Correction: discussion = private chat
ivanbranco (2021-12-29 21:40:19+00:00): No Martino, last time I commented a changeset of yours, you didn't replied and proceded to delete a parking=surface, like you did now.
Anyway, let's stick to the facts, using a parking you just deleted as an example: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1eCr

How is this NOT a parking=surface?
user_10901495 (2021-12-30 08:54:27+00:00): Please link me this changeset discussion in which I hadn't replied ("like you did now"???? I said I didn't read these messages until now)
ivanbranco (2021-12-30 09:06:36+00:00): Martino, can you explain me how this is NOT a parking=surface? I'm trying to understand why are you deleting parkings here.

https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1eCr
user_10901495 (2021-12-30 09:13:27+00:00): I've not deleted any parkings. I've changed surface parkings to street_side because I thought it was better. With that said I changed my mind, as you can see reported on this: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/115535540 changeset discussion.
ivanbranco (2021-12-30 09:28:46+00:00): I literally linked you twice a parking you deleted, how can you say you didn't delete any parkings?

https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1eCr
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1014086682

Here there are more:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1014086686
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1014086680
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1014086685

Since you changed your mind, are you gonna revert this deletions you made?
user_10901495 (2021-12-30 09:51:58+00:00): Can I be excused for not wanting to talk to the wall anymore? 
It's the last time: I said: I'VE CHANGED SURFACE PARKINGS TO STREET_SIDE BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS BETTER. Is it more clear if I write it in uppercase?
user_10901495 (2021-12-30 09:53:19+00:00): And yes of course I'm gonna revert these deletions.
Denis_Helfer (2022-01-06 08:49:45+00:00): Bonjour, quelle est l'analyse osmose utilisée ? Elle n'est pas bonne. La combinaison ref + railway:track_ref était correcte.
Max-Kritic (2022-01-08 08:23:58+00:00): Salut, j'ai failli ne pas voir ton message. 

C'est une nouvelle correction proposée par Osmose.

Elle remplace en ligne ref par railway:track_ref. C'est dans le wiki. Voir https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Key:railway:track_ref


Qu'est ce qui cloche ? Ici, c'est compréhensible et facile à corriger. Pas comme l'erreur sur les passages à niveau de Osmose.
Denis_Helfer (2022-01-10 21:00:50+00:00): De ce que j'ai compris et corrigé, quand ref est absent, on met le contenu de railway:track_ref dans ref. C'est cela l'erreur. 
ref c'est pour le ligne 
railway:track_ref  c'est pour la voie.
Je vais voir Frédéric si tu me donnes le n° du test dans osmose.
Denis_Helfer (2022-01-10 21:01:58+00:00): Je vais mes propres tests de cohérence des tags sur le réseau ferré  français. C'est comme cela que je suis tombé sur ces cas.
user_5359 (2021-12-29 17:28:15+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1eA5. You add a bigger number of unknown tags (only source is defined). Please explain the source / licence of this information and the meaning of the keys.
erickdeoliveiraleal (2021-12-29 20:06:58+00:00): se a via é particular sem acesso, ela deve ser mantida, mas com a propriedade de acesso particular!
BredrickSA (2021-12-29 23:57:13+00:00): Temos que ter bom censo, a via não existe, não é pavimentada e não é aberta ao público por se tratar de propriedade privada, e, estava mapeada como se fosse um extensão da via "Rua Alexandre Monteiro" e ligada a uma outra via inexistente com saída inexistente para a "Rua Domingos de Queiroz". Como não há construções no terreno murado, então não se trata se quer de uma trilha, por este motivo ela foi excluída de acordo com dados de lotes do Geosampa.
tastrax (2022-01-03 02:15:49+00:00): Hi folks FYI - Phone numbers in Australia should be added to OSM according to the following format with the country code +61 x xxxx xxxx, (+61 xxx xxx xxx for mobiles) or use the phone:AU key if a 1300 or 1800 number as per the wiki guidelines https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines - I have just updated a recent addition that you made to OSM – Cheers
archie (2021-12-29 16:50:12+00:00): Wenn du mit "Ek" Eiche meinst, unterlass diese "Namensgebung" bitte, da dies nicht zugelassen ist. Sie weiter in der wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only.
b-holdet (2022-02-08 14:20:07+00:00): Why do you changed alle the roads from residential to track?
It a place for summerhouses and residentials.
Buetro (2022-02-08 18:06:20+00:00): Because they are not roads. They are paths where you could not ride a road bike or inline skates, for example.
b-holdet (2022-02-08 19:30:43+00:00): I DK these roads will be marked as residential as this is "residential"

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dresidential

Tracks are not used for places like this as this is for access to the houses in the area.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrack

Pls. look into this to get more information on how to decide when to use Track.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrack#decide

By the way, I live in this area and have knowledge to these roads condition and use.
Buetro (2022-02-08 19:39:42+00:00): Ok. I think you are right. I just had the problem that my bike tour with the road bike was routed through this area because it is marked as a road. Accordingly, I have adjusted it to the best of my knowledge. From the structure at openstreetmap you are certainly right.
Sorry.
user_5359 (2021-12-30 08:19:56+00:00): Welcome to OSM! You add two nodes for the same shop on different position (one on a parking spot). Which is correct? 
I correct your node https://www.osm.org/node/9376735692 with the full information of the notes https://www.osm.org/note/2987560 and https://www.osm.org/note/2987572

If this isn't correct, please move the information to the other node. Delete also the duplicate node. 

If you need help, You are welcome.
b-holdet (2022-02-08 14:22:32+00:00): Pls. use better comment on the changeset

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
sanchi (2021-12-29 19:17:08+00:00): Hola cdavila.
¿Puedes explicar esta edición?
Hablas de depurar datos pero lo único que sucede es que se borrar los datos existentes. Los datos de CORINE son mejorables, pero no son borrables directamente. El bosque que marcan existe.
Saludos.
cdavila (2021-12-29 21:37:31+00:00): Hola Sanchi
Efectivamente esa zona de pinar existe, pero lo que había no se parecía en nada a la realidad. He corregido muchos polígonos de uso del suelo de la importación de CORINE (que nunca se debió hacer, pero hubo un usuario que se empeñó en contra de la opinión de muchos de la comunidad). Sin embargo, cuando los datos de CORINE son tan diferentes de la realidad creo que mejor que no estén, solo inducen a confusión, y además es menos trabajoso volver a mapearlos sobre una foto aérea que ir corrigiendo todo el perímetro. Por supuesto, es mi opinión, no sé qué pensarás tú.
sanchi (2021-12-30 09:58:03+00:00): Pienso diferente. CORINE se sabe que tiene deficiencias pero en ningún momento lo comunidad ha dicho lo borramos todo. Es lo que se está haciendo en este caso. Yo también he corregido en varias zonas las geometrías de CORINE pero en ningún momento lo he borrado todo.
Si se quiere tirar por borrar habría que hablarlo con la comunidad y ver que se piensa en general no lo que pensemos tu o yo en particular.
Por ello creo que esto se debería revertir y si se quiere tirar por esa vía enviarlo a la lista de correo para que se hable y se decida que hacer.
Saludos.
cdavila (2021-12-30 10:16:52+00:00): No se trata de borrar todo CORINE, es solo un polígono que era un desastre. Creo que en estos casos es mejor no tener información que tenerla tan mala o perder un tiempo que no tenemos en intentar arreglarla.
Como sabes, sobre este tema ya se ha hablado más de una vez en las listas de correo, sin llegar a ninguna conclusión...
sanchi (2021-12-30 10:44:09+00:00): Son todos mejorables. Por ese sentido borro uno cada día y digo lo he borrado porque era solo un polígono y desaparece CORINE.
Lo que se ha conseguido es que un bosque que existía mejor o peor trazado ha desaparecido y ahora no existe. O se arregla o no se arregla pero no se hace desaparecer sin más.
lololailo (2021-12-30 15:23:57+00:00): Hola, perdonad que me entrometa pero el tema me interesa. Yo he borrado recientemente varios polígonos de Corine pero para posteriormente dibujarlos correctamente ya que como dice le compañero es más rápido dibujarlo de nuevo a modificarlo. No se si he hecho bien, pero como digo solo he borrado lo que a continuación he redibujado. Un saludo
cdavila (2021-12-30 16:44:26+00:00): No te preocupes, no es intromisión, al contrario. Yo creo que la calidad de los datos es importante y que es mejor no tener datos de algo a tenerlos muy malos. @sanchi ¿me puedes decir por ejemplo qué sentido tiene mantener polígonos como este: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/93596544 ?