piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:53:17+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:51:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:48:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:52:09+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
bxl-forever (2022-10-11 16:22:39+00:00): Hello,

What does the changeset title mean?

Also, if you add "highway=path" on the way, you should also delete the existing that that says it is not a path (disused:highway=path), otherwise the database gets extremely messy.

Of course I can do it myself, but I felt you might be interested in learning this, so that you get extra skills to do it right the next time.

Have a nice day.
Bear-in-a-box (2022-10-11 18:30:12+00:00): Hi, I did not add "highway=path"....it was deleted I think but the path is there in reality!
Bear-in-a-box (2022-10-11 18:31:07+00:00): ah yes, the title... this former "path" was converted by somebody into a "line" and so it does not show up as a path...which it actually is.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:52:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:48:04+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:52:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
Thierry1030 (2023-11-19 13:21:42+00:00): hello, 
this way used to be mapped as a disused:highway=path but you added highway=cycleway. Can you explain why?

This note just has been marked:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3993334#map=15/50.7789/4.4357
"No cycleway here. Illégal path protected zone and trees placed to block entrance
https://westnordost.de/p/186860.jpg
https://westnordost.de/p/186861.jpg
https://westnordost.de/p/186862.jpg
Bear-in-a-box (2023-11-20 12:31:31+00:00): Hello, it seems this discussion about legality and blocking trees is 1 day old while my edit is 1 year old. 
Until some month ago this was certainly a path and if I remember correctly there were signs there saying something like "boitsfort cycle path"
ratrun (2022-10-13 17:43:31+00:00): Can you explain what you have done here? This changeset looks pretty strange and I would suggest a revert.
Ansgar77 (2022-10-14 14:55:51+00:00): Yes, you’re right. I had unexplainable problems with Go Map. I couldn’t see my changes in the map…
I’ lll revert it when I’m back home next week!
Thank you for your hint!
Ansgar
ratrun (2022-10-14 15:12:32+00:00): Thanks for responding. Now that you explained that the changeset was buggy I reverted it, see changest 127531244.

BR
ratrun
Ansgar77 (2022-10-15 16:18:37+00:00): Ok, thank you ratrun and sorry for the trouble!
Ansgar
eggie (2022-10-10 15:18:22+00:00): Een lastige...   
Vraagje voor het vernieuwde forum denk ik..
https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/nl/43

Groet
eggie
Muhmaker (2022-10-10 17:11:00+00:00): Hi. Can you please explain why you consider the ref-keys of the guideposts to be spam?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/127290985
Edman92 (2022-10-10 17:41:48+00:00): Good day to you!
According to the Ref-keys mapping rules placed here:
https://wiki.openstreetmaporg/wiki/DE:Key:ref
In Ref we do not provide address information.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/127290985
Muhmaker (2022-10-11 07:43:28+00:00): First of all, the information removed is not an address in the German spelling. Furthermore, I cannot find any evidence for your argument in the linked source. Many of the examples there show short numeric ref values. But the use of longer values that also contain text is not prohibited.
Based on your employer, I assume there was a problem in one of their applications. Probably duplicate destination information in a routing application. I will restore the deleted information in a sub-ref-key. In the future, please do not destroy the work of local mappers with condescending comments. It would be better to seek discussion to find a solution together for possibly problematic data.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
Edman92 (2022-10-11 15:12:39+00:00): I heard you, but from the editing rules posted on OpenStreetMaps Wiki, it is said that when editing Ref keys, you need to take into account that in Ref keys apply only alphanumeric abbreviations.
Any integer words, addresses, names of cities, districts and so on in Ref Keys are not allowed.
You have, in Ref Keys made a revision with the name of the street and district.
Please consider these features when making changes to the map.
Have a good day!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/127290985
osmviborg (2022-10-10 10:38:36+00:00): Combined cycle- and footway: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dcycleway#Usage_for_shared_paths
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:52:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:49:38+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:47:35+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:52:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:47:10+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:50:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
Aleksey Gorelikov (2022-10-10 09:55:37+00:00): https://data-usdot.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/highway-performance-monitoring-system-fsys-3/explore?location=37.933566%2C-81.146898%2C19.46
maraf24 (2023-08-09 11:20:35+00:00): Błędna edycja, jest pas rowerowy po zachodniej stronie.
Frans S (2022-10-10 10:46:45+00:00): Hello.  These objects are no buildings. Piles of fabricated products. No need to map.
Best regards
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/127293138
_klaas_ (2022-10-11 12:12:11+00:00): Hallo U R I,

warum hast du bei mehreren Leitungen das tag "circuits" gelöscht?
Ist das versehentlich passiert oder hat das einen bestimmten Grund?

VG
Klaas
noelbov (2022-10-13 14:42:34+00:00): Geachte JVH,

Ik zou graag willen weten wat u juist vereenvoudigd hebt, want er zijn een aantal onnauwkeurigheden als gevolg van uw ingrijpen, meer bepaald:
- zie ik dat bij de ingang van de tunnel fietsknooppunt 7 is weggedaan, maar de node 178932191 is nog steeds member van Fietsroutenetwerk B Voorkempen. Dit membership zou wegmoeten indien het rcn-knooppunt effectief verwijderd moet zijn. (Onverwachte knoop)
- hierdoor is er ook een onderbreking van fietsknooppuntroute 7-55 en
- zijn er 2 fietsknooppuntroutes 7-80 en 7-18 met een extra ongebruikt segment 

Voor dit alles: zie
https://www.knooppuntnet.nl/nl/analysis/network/1741536/facts

Indien u verkiest dat ik dit terug in orde breng, laat het mij dan weten, maar breng mij dan op de hoogte hoe het zit op het terrein: is dat fietsknooppunt 7 bij de tunnelingang effectief afgeschaft of niet?

Dank u voor antwoord.
nb
jvh (2022-10-15 12:02:17+00:00): Ik heb niet bewust het rcn willen aanpassen, enkel het kruispunt aan de tunnelingang herleiden tot een enkel kruispunt. 

Ik merk nu wel dat er twee knooppunten 7 zijn/waren. Dus weet ik niet wat de beste manier is om dit te mappen. Ik controleer dinsdag de situatie op het terrein mbt knooppunten.
noelbov (2022-10-15 12:49:26+00:00): Een goed idee om dit op het terrein te bekijken want op https://www.vlaanderen-fietsland.be/nl/routeplanner staat 1 knooppunt en op https://www.fietsnet.be/routeplanner/default.aspx staan er 2.

Ik wacht het resultaat van uw controle af.
Tot dan,
nb
jvh (2022-10-22 15:13:47+00:00): Er staat wel degelijk aan beide punten nog steeds een bordje voor knoop 7. De provincie beschouwt het blijkbaar als één grote knoop. Wat logisch is. Hoe je dan op OSM de routes moet ingeven tussen beide punten "7" is me niet duidelijk.
noelbov (2022-10-22 16:14:31+00:00): Ik heb het betrokken knooppunt terug toegevoegd en de routes 7-55, 7-80, 7-18 en 7-14 bekeken en aangepast.
Nu zijn de 'facts' verdwenen op https://www.knooppuntnet.nl/en/analysis/network/1741536/facts die betrekking hadden met knooppunt 7.

Dank voor de opvolging.
highflyer74 (2022-10-11 05:06:12+00:00): Moin!

Ein kleiner Tipp hier: der von dir bearbeitete Schlüsseldienst in Berlin hatte bei Telefon- und Faxnummern zwei Leerzeichen hintereinander. Dann wollte ich noch kurz auf den Unterschied zwischen name=* und operator=* hinweisen. Den Namen erfassen wir ohne die Gesellschaftsform (in diesem Fall GmbH). Das kommt dann in den operator=*. Ich hab's entsprechend umgebaut :-)

Schönen Tag dir!
delineatorix (2022-10-11 05:15:34+00:00): Danke für die Tipps und Korrekturen.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:48:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:50:12+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
Frans S (2022-10-10 10:41:36+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
I am a Sr Validator and review mapped tasks at random or as requested. 
I am sorry to say, but your mappings not that accurate and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention to next points:
You did not tag buildings. Each building should be tagged with building=yes.
Your mappings are a bit sloppy. Not squared, include the shadow on the ground.
Please improve your mapping skills.




Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/127294137
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:50:52+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:51:35+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:52:42+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
eggie (2022-10-10 11:11:19+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

Tip.. healthcare rendert helaas nog niet. Een toevoeging van office=therapist zorgt wel voor rendering mits de vlag de lading dekt. 

Ik he je info samengevoegd met de aanwezige adresnode en het adres /postcode (geen spatie) verbeterd.
Het is hier de Bornsesteeg

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
Frans S (2022-10-10 10:48:11+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
I am a Sr Validator and review mapped tasks at random or as requested. 
I am sorry to say, but your mappings are not that accurate and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention to next points:
You did not tag each building with building=yes.
* Pay more attention to accurate mapping over the rooflines. 
* Most buildings are strict rectangular. Please square them after you drawn it, and still selected, with the Q key. 
* Tagging of buildings. For HOTOSM projects, the standard tagging is 'building=yes' No text adding.  Please keep that in mind at further mappings.




Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/127294397
user_5359 (2022-10-12 05:53:58+00:00): Hello! Please hav e a look on http://www.osm.org/way/1102570621. what is the meaning of this tags
2010 = KAMWENGE
2016 = KAMWENGE
2017 = KAMWENGE
2018 = KAMWENGE
2020 = KITAGWENDA
d = Kitagwenda
dname2019 = KITAGWENDA
total2020 = 178,300
ttotal2020 = 178300.0
?
Micheal Kal (2022-10-12 07:16:45+00:00): Hi, sorry those were some attributes that I had forgotten to delete before upload but I have fixed it. Thank you
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:48:56+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:53:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:46:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
mueschel (2022-11-05 12:45:43+00:00): Hi,
what does '  designation:wegenlegger = eigen_weg' mean? This tag isn't used in any other place.
Allroads (2022-11-06 12:34:16+00:00): In short words, it give the legal status of a road.
The difference between legal public access and actual public access.

Outside the, by law, "bebouwde kom" an "urban border", municipality sets the boundary, the municipality has to list roads, who owns them, who does the maintenance, also surface. This is called "wegenlegger".

This list is the basis, where traffic orders may or may not be mandatory. Which are officially announced on:
https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/resultaten?q=(c.product-area==%22officielepublicaties%22)and(dt.subject=%22Verkeer%22)and(((w.publicatienaam==%22Tractatenblad%22))or((w.publicatienaam==%22Staatsblad%22))or((w.publicatienaam==%22Staatscourant%22))or((w.publicatienaam==%22Gemeenteblad%22))or((w.publicatienaam==%22Provinciaal%20blad%22))or((w.publicatienaam==%22Waterschapsblad%22))or((w.publicatienaam==%22Blad%20gemeenschappelijke%20regeling%22)))&zv=&col=AlleBekendmakingen

Which you can object to.


Then there is also a rule, that if people use a road, it can be prevented from falling inside this list. There you can indicate it with signage "eigen weg" "privat road", then you will not be in this list and you may then determine to close the road at any time. What we mean by permissive.

For the signs, I use access_sign=NL:EW

Someone started to use:
designation:NL:wegenwet=eigen_weg on the road

I thought I took over this one correctly.
I will change it. 

Law: art 4  2-3
https://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0001948/2021-07-01#HoofdstukII_Artikel4

On these "eigen weg" roads, traffic rules still apply on these roads.
https://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0004825/2021-07-01

but

Side by side, different laws operate.
If one prohibits it, it is prohibited.
Such as: Civil code and penalties.
For trespassing on someone else's property.
https://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0001854/2020-01-01#BoekDerde_TiteldeelVII_Artikel461

For these type of prohibition I use access_sign.
Such as:
access_sign=NL:VT
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eigen_weg
Allroads (2022-11-06 12:45:31+00:00): Changed:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1066107746#map=17/52.72196/5.87006
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:50:04+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:56:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:49:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:47:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
Bexhill-OSM (2022-10-10 16:39:06+00:00): The description tagging on the house in Belle Hill is inappropriate. I will be reverting your changes.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:55:20+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:51:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:51:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:54:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:47:06+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:47:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:48:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:47:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:51:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:49:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:56:16+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-15 08:50:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127558159, 127559578 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: undiscussed low quality import of buildings. Also this user has circumvented a previous block by creating new accounts.