piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
SomeoneElse (2019-03-31 14:41:33+00:00): Hello traveleditor,
People have complained about your edits in Kungalv, including changing secondary roads to primary.  In OpenStreetMap we map things that actually exist, we don't imagine what they might be like.  If you'd like to create imaginery maps, perhaps something like https://opengeofiction.net would be a better place?
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.
SomeoneElse (2019-03-31 14:42:20+00:00): Hello traveleditor,
Orang ramai telah mengadu tentang pengeditan anda di Kungalv, termasuk menukar jalan menengah ke peringkat rendah. Di OpenStreetMap kita memetakan perkara-perkara yang sebenarnya wujud, kita tidak membayangkan apa yang mereka mungkin seperti. Sekiranya anda ingin mencipta peta imaginasi, mungkin sesuatu seperti https://opengeofiction.net akan menjadi tempat yang lebih baik?
Selamat sejahtera,
Andy Townsend, bagi pihak Kumpulan Kerja Data OSM.
Dimacn (2019-03-30 04:38:23+00:00): Спасибо за улучшение карты OSM. Но есть замечания: 1. у жилого дома не должно быть названий. Пожалуйста удалите текст из тега name. 2. тег building в вашем случае должен иметь значение apartments
Александр Рахмилевич (2019-03-30 02:11:10+00:00): Лисавенко ни причем, ошибка
azakh-world (2019-04-01 11:30:09+00:00): Hello.
A subway line relation must contain stations in order, only one object (station or stop_position) per station, and rails must be sorted to form continuous line. After you changes relation 2672369 got broken (I have not examined other lines yet), as well as some stop_area relations. Please stop subway improvements until getting familiar with public transport mapping and working with relations in general.
nickvet419 (2019-04-01 17:32:22+00:00): hmm,  i didn't add any stops.. just moved them..
nickvet419 (2019-04-01 17:35:48+00:00): ahhh.  i see the problems..  ill fit them
nickvet419 (2019-04-01 17:48:28+00:00): should be fixed now.   thanks for the heads up.
azakh-world (2019-04-02 09:32:49+00:00): Thank you for response. Still, now it's too many O'Hare stops in the route, and rail sequence is torn. No need to add all stop_positions at a station and the whole rail brunching into the route relation.
Also, ID editor is not handy to maintain relations.
I'm gonna revise and correct it soon. If you wanna help with subways, please, follow wiki, especially https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Metro_Mapping
and try JOSM when dealing with relations.
pitscheplatsch (2019-03-30 16:59:44+00:00): Hi Dank311, welcome to OSM.

May I know the reason behind deleting the entire golf course which you mapped before? Thanks.

More information about your changeset: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=68684603
interdite (2019-03-30 03:11:13+00:00): .. und eine neue Track-Relation für die NBS Erfurt-Ebensfeld. Bin versehentlich auf "Enter" gekommen.
aharvey (2019-10-01 05:49:26+00:00): What's bicycle=stupid mean here?
eggie (2019-03-30 08:25:14+00:00): Hi interdite,
Your intention is okay, but...
Please decrease your area.. Don't map random. It's hard to check and validate  your edits. 
Upload an leave the editmodus and than shift to an other spot.
Eggie
geri-oc (2019-09-26 11:27:09+00:00): Bei ordnungsgemäßer Kontrolle hätte man feststellen müssen, das die Firma Antiquitäten Ralph Geisler schon lange umgezogen ist:
https://www.antiquitaeten-erzgebirge.de/

way 161507900
source=local knowledge?

Gruß Gerd
interdite (2019-03-30 04:36:50+00:00): I really can't figure out what I've changed in Bulgaria. ??
eggie (2019-03-30 08:01:32+00:00): Hi.. You are familiar with mapping in the Netherlands? 
You are a starting mapper?
You are speaking Dutch?
I will send you some welcome, hint and usefull links.
Please be carefull with the map.
Gr Eggie
eggie (2019-03-30 08:06:09+00:00): You dind'nt upload your last edit in SE Europe and shifted the map in editmodus to the Netherlands.
eggie (2019-03-30 08:08:22+00:00): Your edits in Bulgaria.. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/440787610#map=15/42.0796/24.8196
eggie (2019-03-30 08:04:12+00:00): BING is outdates and not lined up with reality!
Eggie
eggie (2019-03-30 08:04:41+00:00): typo.. out-dated..
interdite (2019-04-01 12:10:12+00:00): Actually I've used PDOK!
eggie (2019-04-01 13:26:57+00:00): Oke.. I believe you..but.. 
not accourding your changeset-info. source=Bing
Look above.. 
You may change the source in the line at upload..
"Verkrijgbaar uit de huidige  lagen". 
Use the present layers. 
Just click the hyperlink. 
JOSM will mention the present layer as source automatically.
Gr eggie
Frans S (2019-04-02 14:05:17+00:00): Hello Silvia.  Thanks for mapping on this project. A request. Please review the highway wiki before tagging highways. A tag highway=unclassified is not suited for a path of 1,5 mtrs wide.  Path or track should be more appropriate.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Bgirardot/West_African_HOT_Mapping_Tips
and
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_Tag_Africa
Best regards and keep mapping
rab (2019-03-30 11:41:19+00:00): Stop this! I will remove this nonsense unclassifieds anyway
Kathyaus (2019-03-30 12:27:29+00:00): @rab - I don't understand what you are saying. The tagging guide https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/HighwayTagAfrica indicates that tracks do not having a connector function, and primarily used in agricultural/forestry areas. I imagine they would logging tracks, or tractor paths. The roads in this task seem to connect hamlets/residential dwellings, which would make them unclassified/residential.
rab (2019-03-30 17:12:49+00:00): I see two school yards, some stores in the bend of the tertiary road, a mostly agricultural used area with single houses. Even at the largest buildings there is no car visible. That means: People walk to the stores, to their neighbours, to their fields and children walk to the schools. If you measure the ways with the measurement tool you will see that most of this ways are way to narrow  for a unclassified road. Most of this small paths should not been mapped at all. Please check this way:https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/680585982 . It's a 3m diameter, drawn over one of your "unclassified" roads. Try also this document as reference for tagging roads
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OSPFZsTLr-QbJjLSUT3ZTRm08OdoH__T/view
ma-rt-in (2019-03-30 21:29:24+00:00): Hallo,
ich werde deinen Eintrag zurücksetzten, bzw. löschen, da das Krankenhaus bereits vorhanden ist.
vg
mbethke (2019-04-07 05:44:14+00:00): Hi,
good updates, but that's not really its name, is it? It's noit *called* "construction site", it *is* a construction site - and building=construction says that already.

cheers,
Matthias
kartonage (2019-03-30 08:43:26+00:00): Hallo Olaf789 und willkommen bei OSM,

du ergänzt hier eine ganze Reihe an Tags an Objekten die schon impliziert sind. motor_vehicle=yes; tunnel=no; bridge=no; oneway=no; ford=no; bicycle=yes; foot=yes. Diese Tags sind in der Regel nicht nötig. Ein horse=no kommt auch nur, wenn ein explizites Verbot besteht. Also brauchst du es für die meisten Objekte nicht ergänzen.
//
Wenn du Lust hast dich noch mehr in OSM einzubinden, kann ich dir folgendes Tutorial (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/file:Osm-tutorial.pdf) ans Herz legen. Ein Blick ins Wiki schadet auch nie (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Hauptseite) und hilft einem schnell auf die Sprünge bestimmte Dinge passend einzutragen.
//
Falls du Fragen hast, gern nachhaken. Ansonsten happy mapping!
Warin61 (2019-04-01 06:31:33+00:00): You have now made the relationship for Quillben State Forest (257105426) only have inners .. no outer way?!!!!!
Warin61 (2019-04-06 02:57:10+00:00): 1) I note that this state forest is for the production of timber? It would therefore be best tagged landuse=forest ... 
2) Your source for changing the boundaries? You cannot use trees as these may exist outside the boundaries and may not exist inside the boundaries (as in they have been harvested in some areas).
3) The old relation is now broken .. 

You should comment on this ..
MarkLD (2019-04-06 03:58:20+00:00): Hi Warin61, 
In answer to your questions 1).Yes, it should be tagged as landuse=managed forest as outlined in the OpenStreetMap decoram, but there is one problem with this, and that there is no distinct map rendering colour to differentiate between manmade plantations and native forests or woods (as termed in Europe). By labelling as landuse=Managed forests, one cannot visually distinguish between the two, therefore I chose natural=woods because of the colour difference that is rendered in a number of mobile apps that use OpenStreetMap data eg. OsmAnd. I am a Forester and I work extensively in these forest areas of the south west of Western Australia, and so I use OsmAnd to locate plant populations and navigate myself around with. There are a number of plantations located within the Quillben/Kinkin state forest areas but if they are rendered with landuse=managed forests they will not be distinguishable on the map apps. 
2) My source for changing the boundaries was derived from the State Emergency Service Atlas 2018 edition that is used by multiple state government agencies within Western Australia. The boundaries I employed, were used to distinguish the administrative boundaries of  state forests for management purposes in forestry and conservation by both the Forest Products Commission, whom I work for, and the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation & Attractions, both Western Australian state government agencies. These state forest boundaries encompass the trees within it and should be included. If there is an alternative way of rendering this, please let me know.
3) In regards to the broken relation, can you please elaborate and explain the consequences of this action?

I appreciate your feedback and advice on this matter.
Warin61 (2019-04-06 05:09:37+00:00): 1a) OsmAnd is a tremendous app. I use it. it is possible to customize the rendering .. so you might have landuse=forest show anyway you like .. fingers crossed. 
https://osmand.net/help/docs/Custom_Rendering_How-To.htm

Looking at mapnik rendering in OsmAnd the colours are the same for both wood and forest (and that is fairly typical of all renders) ... which rendering are you using? Or do you have a different tag that you use for this change in colour? 

1b) Tag the truth .. and let the renders do there thing.. By tagging it as natural=wood it is misleading.. and does not conform to what is done elsewhere .. particularly in NSW where I have it all as landuse=forest ... :) 

2) don't know what copyright restriction that may have .. is it compatible with OSM copyright requirements? That is a big problem with this type of stuff

3) The problem is the old relation is left behind with errors... I can delete it .. but I would like you to check the copyright in 2) before I do ... If there is a copyright problem then it is much easier to go back and remove the copyright stuff if I have not touched it.
MarkLD (2019-04-06 08:43:22+00:00): Excellent Warin61, I understand. I will change the tag to landuse=managed forest and check on the copyright restriction on the atlas and get back to you (maybe not until Monday). In the meantime I will check out the link you sent me and see if I can make some adjustments to my OsmAnd rendering file. I am using Mapnik as my map style rendering in OsmAnd. Many thanks for your advice and guidance. Cheers, Mark
Warin61 (2019-04-06 21:13:10+00:00): I think making the landuse=froest similar to landuse=military might be simplest .. with stripes of green rather than a solid colour .. but I have not looked in to it yet .. too much to do.
MarkLD (2019-04-08 12:11:23+00:00): Here is an extract from the printed Atlas pertaining to the 1968 Copyright Act, "a person may not in any form or by any means: adapt, reproduce, store, distribute, in the publication resides with the State of Western Australia. Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of private study, research print, display, perform, publish or create derivative works from any part of the publication". 
Based on the above statement, I interpret this as a "fair dealing"  in using the boundary data for the state forests. What are your thoughts?
Warin61 (2019-04-08 21:16:53+00:00): Under the 1968 copyright act OSM is not allowed to use the data. The act was amended in 2006 .. under that amendment OSM is not allowed to use the data. 

No go. The wording of that summery is poor .. misses quite a bit. A somewhat better summary is 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_Australia#Fair_dealing
MarkLD (2019-04-09 09:58:24+00:00): Many thanks Warin61 for clarifying the copyright laws concerning the use of external data. In that case I will remove the boundary level for Quillben State Forest and in future ensure that I just use my own field notes, surveys and knowledge of the areas for rendering those areas not captured by aerial photography.
Warin61 (2019-04-09 23:28:27+00:00): I'll restore the old entry for this state forest. 

One place i worked in had a summery of the copyright laws above the photocopying machines.. there is a limit of 10% of the work that can be copied for study/research/review .. over that 10% and you breach the law.. think that is case law as determined by a court .. not in the act/regs.
oba510 (2019-03-31 09:43:35+00:00): It doesn't make sense to delete the entire 2-1/2 block long alley when only a small section is impassible. It can be seen clearly in the aerial imagery and on mapillary.
jguthula (2019-04-02 12:16:47+00:00): Hi oba510,

Thanks for looking into this edit. The editor has made this edit as per aerial imagery but by mistake forgot to split the road and deleted the entire segment. Ideally it should have been caught in our review system but since OSMCha is not working, we missed to identify the deleted segment. 

Thanks for reverting the changes and fix it back in OSM. Please do let us know if there are any other such errors. We are actively looking forward to engage with the community and learn more from them.

Happy Mapping!

Regards,
Jothirnadh
pio2_122 (2020-03-28 09:59:42+00:00): Nieźle. Zmieniłeś adres na niepoprawny, a do tego Urząd Miejski ma siedzibę na Obrońców Pokoju 24, nie na Dembowskiego 2....
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/68689072
Vidua (2020-03-28 10:08:01+00:00): Teraz tak ale nie kiedy wprowadzałem zmianę. Został przeniesiony. Zrobisz korektę czy ja mam?
pio2_122 (2020-03-28 10:08:52+00:00): Rozumiem, za chwilę naniosę punkt we właściwe miejsce.
abrensch (2019-04-23 17:19:35+00:00): Hallo Jeka,

shcuast Du Dir mal dieses Wegstück an:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/72893699

Rechts davon ist ein Loch in der L63, das hat offenbar dieser CS hier gemacht.

Gruss, Arndt
jeka p (2019-04-23 19:40:48+00:00): Hallo Arndt,
vielen Dank - habe repariert!
SG,
Jeka
look4book (2019-04-02 13:20:05+00:00): what a crap! - https:// might be considerable, but the protocol has still to negotiated between browser and site! 
WWW still runs on port 80, and if the site can not or wants not to offer TLS, https:// WILL fail.
so please: REVERT!. 
if this was an automatic edit: REVERT!
b-jazz (2019-04-02 14:29:22+00:00): If the site can not do https, or doesn’t want to use https, this change wouldn’t have been made. These changes are only done to sites that actively announce their desire for clients to talk to them on port 443.
mueschel (2019-03-30 11:46:11+00:00): Hi,
please watch out for the correct spelling of ref tags - capitalization matters. I just fixed various different tags, for example
ref:fr:ptt:nra -> ref:FR:PTT:NRA
ref:fr:orange -> ref:FR:Orange
arcth (2019-03-31 22:59:50+00:00): These buildings were demolished around year 2016.
richlv (2019-04-01 09:35:24+00:00): Dang, thank you - they looked fairly fresh on the sat layer ;)
Perhaps a "note" tag around here could help future mappers.
richlv (2019-04-04 09:34:37+00:00): Noticed in #osm that for another location it was suggested to leave the outlines in place, prefixing them with demolished: - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:demolished: .

Does that sound good?
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-02-23 21:24:57+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/135363912/history has NH=65 key 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?
maraf24 (2019-04-01 09:57:10+00:00): Nie powiedziałbym, że to jest "below default":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/433122105
aappeexx (2019-04-02 14:51:36+00:00): To proszę skasować.
eggie (2019-03-30 10:05:13+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
eggie (2019-03-30 10:11:57+00:00): Lijkt me oke... Je zou even een terugmelding kunnen doen richting Kadaster, want ook hier ontbreekt nummer 13 Pand selecteren en op het potloodje klikken. 
https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl/lvbag/bag-viewer/index.html#?searchQuery=De%20Grift%2015&resultOffset=0&objectId=0148100000022528&geometry.x=213207.98499573&geometry.y=511560.26299851&zoomlevel=7&detailsObjectId=0148010000011603

MVG,
Eggie
abrensch (2019-10-05 15:03:13+00:00): Hallo Jeti87,

kennst Du den aktuellen Status der K 8115

noch gesperrt?

Danke und Gruss, Arndt
Jeti87 (2019-10-05 15:46:35+00:00): Ich habe es mal raus genommen. Sollte fertig sein. Wegen anderer Umleitung komme ich leider aktuell nicht vorbei.
Dimacn (2019-04-25 18:11:08+00:00): Весь ваш покемономусор в виде несуществующих парков отдыха будет удалён до изначального состояния карты. Что такое парки отдыха в OSM - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Tag:leisure=park
aseerel4c26 (2019-03-30 10:32:39+00:00): oops, dritte note ist: 1720636
aseerel4c26 (2019-03-30 10:34:16+00:00): oops2: Positionsquelle von Hotkotspender+Eimer und Wegoberfl. ist die Note-Position.
Frans S (2019-04-04 10:38:39+00:00): Hi Piaco. Thanks for mapping.  A remark.
a highway on which you see 2 tracks, which means accessible for 4wheel traffic should not be mapped as path. Depending on destignation , track, unclassified or service way.  Please check the wiki for East African Highways tags .
A remark.  I noticed that you are a Validater as well (starred)  Why not validating here. There is a serious shortage on Validators. 
Best regards
piaco_dk (2019-04-04 23:58:31+00:00): Hi Frans S.  Thanks for your note. I know about the tags and I think I've just been too fast with the pencil :-)
..And by the way I'm a mapper -not a validator. I think the title came along with a TM update and I don't know why.
Have a nice day :-)   /pia
std_82 (2019-09-12 07:56:11+00:00): Hi! Du hast hier die VBB-Referenz gelöscht, weil sie falsch ist. Besser wäre es gewesen, sie zu korrigieren. Der VBB hat vor gewisser Zeit sein Nummernschema geändert. Aus den siebenstelligen Nummern mit der 9* am Anfang wurden jetzt neunstellige Nummern die mit 900* beginnen.
gendy54 (2019-11-10 22:40:23+00:00): Bonsoir,
J'annule les changements sur la caserne de Mérignac. En affectant le tag "fire_station" sur chacun des bâtiments de la caserne, cela revient à dire qu'il y a 9 casernes de pompiers, donc erroné. Chaque élément ne doit être cartographié qu'une seule fois. Je mets le tag sur toute l'emprise de la caserne.
Vinber (2020-04-25 17:47:08+00:00): Bonjour,
je viens de regarder certains des changement de ce groupe, il y a une confusion je pense entre transformer et power_station non ? http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/fr/map/?#zoom=13&lat=44.8212&lon=-0.6246&item=9100&level=1%2C2%2C3&tags=&fixable=

Et pourriez vous préciser ce que vous faites, modifications diverses, mineures n'est pas vraiment une manière de décrire son ensemble de modifications https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bonnes_pratiques#Bons_commentaires_de_groupe_de_modifications
et peut-être des ensembles un peu moins étendus ?
Dispo pour discuter évidemment
PT-53 (2019-08-25 09:51:42+00:00): Hallo NUP,
über brouter-suspects bin ich auf diesen Straßenabschnitt
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/484029333/history
aufmerksam geworden.
Ist diese Straßenführung und Sperrung noch aktuell?
Fragende Grüße
PT-53 (2019-09-01 07:05:20+00:00): Hallo NUP, 
es wäre schön, wenn Du noch antworten würdest.
Grüße
PT-53 (2019-09-08 10:02:42+00:00): Hallo NUP,
es wäre schön, wenn Du noch antworten würdest.
Grüße
PT-53 (2019-09-23 12:39:24+00:00): Hallo NUP,
es wäre schön, wenn Du noch antworten würdest.
Grüße
gormur (2019-05-23 10:49:20+00:00): The nightmare is certainly you deleting information from the more complete relation. If only you had copied the tags from the aerodrome node... 
Sometimes duplicate information is accepted. The world is not black and white. :/
gormur (2019-05-23 10:53:55+00:00): reverted
eggie (2019-03-30 15:23:13+00:00): Hi.. The cycleroute follows an other track now. East of Oude IJsselweg. 
Gr Eggie
MicDK (2019-03-30 17:06:58+00:00): Dette er vist en slags sabotage af mine indtegninger. I stedet for at kontakte mig, sletter du en masse af min møjsommeligt udførte indtegninger på et forkert grundlag (din egen opfattelse af, at jeg har indtegnet for mange områder). 

Du kan være uenige i den måde, områderne omkring plejecentret er tegnet ind, men så skriv det så i stedet for at slette løs fra en ende af.

Landuse er brugt korrekt, såfremt "social facility" skal kobles med område="commercial". 

Ja, det er mange små områder, og efter en mere konstruktiv diskussion med Hjart, har jeg et løsningsforslag på det, som vil reducere antallet områder markant. Det vil blive afprøvet også på plejecenteret. Så der hverken bliver problemer med renderingen eller funktionerne i Overpass.

Jeg skulle alligevel slette de små områder, for at samle dem til noget større. Det er ikke. Det er din asociale opførelse, hvor du bare gør, som du selv vil. Et brud på god skik og bruge i OSM-communityet.
mikkolukas (2019-03-30 17:31:41+00:00): Well, den helt enkle måde er at markere hele området og sætte det til landuse=commercial

Vi skal ikke tegne ud fra hvordan det eventuelt blvier rendered i mapnik.

Jeg er enig i at jeg har taget et voldsomt træk, men indtegningerne var helt ude i hampen her.

hvis man skulle følge dity eksempel, så ville landuse=residential jo blive til milliarder af mikroskopiske områder - det ville ingen mening give.

Jeg vil mene den eneste korrekte måde at bruge landuse=commercial - er på samme måde som man bruger landuse=residential: Som et større samlet område der omkranser en sammenhæng af huse, veje, stier mv.
robert (2019-03-30 15:29:52+00:00): Good edit - welcome to OpenStreetMap!
tanonin (2021-08-10 21:37:17+00:00): Bonjour, je suis passé et je n'ai pas trouvé le chemin https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/680546885
existe-t-il vraiment?
PT-53 (2019-03-30 15:11:37+00:00): Hallo mleza,
ich habe Deine erneut falschen maxspeed-Eingaben wieder gelöscht.
Siehe CS https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/68480909#map=16/48.0759/9.8243
user_5359 (2019-03-31 15:10:47+00:00): Hello! Could you please check also the node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/358277939 (playground inside of a building)? Thanks!
Elli21486 (2019-04-01 04:54:21+00:00): I didn't even notice that node. I will check on it in the near future since I have some business there.
tux67 (2019-04-02 09:35:19+00:00): Hi, war das Absicht den Landuse nicht in das Multipolygon zu integrieren?
Gruß
tux67
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/68698189
abbst (2019-04-02 11:35:05+00:00): Hi, 
ja, da ist eine Insel, die aber noch nicht richtig angezeigt wird. Muss mal schauen, was da fehlt.
Gruß
Andreas
ma-rt-in (2019-03-30 21:27:21+00:00): Hallo,
warum hast du hw=steps entfernt, das hier schon noch nötig.
vg
dsnsxprmnt (2019-03-31 14:41:09+00:00): Hi,

das scheint mir versehentlich passiert zu sein. Bisher war hier keine Rolltreppe, sondern nur eine reguläre Treppe verzeichnet. Hoffe, dass jetzt alles korrekt ist!

LG
ma-rt-in (2019-03-31 15:26:30+00:00): ja sollte passen.