piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Jean-Marc Liotier (2017-09-05 12:37:48+00:00): Très intéressant - j'ai testé dans une zone en évolution rapide du côté de Tivaouane Peul: ESRI est plus récent que Digitalglobe Premium et de qualité au moins aussi bonne.

Par contre je manque affreusement de points de repère pour juger de la qualité de l'alignement. La différence entre les deux est parfois de l'ordre d'une quinzaine de mètres - suffisant pour être gênant en édition urbaine dense.
freepi_gus (2017-09-05 14:04:38+00:00): On pourrait continuer cette discussion sur Talk-sn. Il parait assez urgent de se fixer une imagerie de référence et d'essayer d'obtenir de la donnée GPS. Cette problématique de choix d'image se pose ou va se poser partout dans la sous-région (et au delà) avec l'arrivée de 2 sources DG + ESRI.
Jean-Marc Liotier (2017-09-05 14:42:43+00:00): Bonne idée - c'est envoyé: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-sn/2017-September/000593.html
yurasi (2017-08-17 21:44:19+00:00): Hi Srihari Thalla
Does this town really exist? I would like to know the source that you had use.   
Because the wikidata isn't correct. It have general meaning for different places 
Here are the links: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q399399
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manu
DaxServer (2017-08-18 07:13:32+00:00): Sorry yurasi, I should have used JOSM instead. I thought Manu referred to the place when it popped up in iD. I'll revert the change.
DaxServer (2017-08-18 07:18:12+00:00): I have reverted it - http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/51223584
Thanks!
DaxServer (2017-08-18 07:50:20+00:00): I have reverted two more incorrect tags -

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/51224096
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/51224177
yurasi (2017-08-18 14:50:30+00:00): Thanks for you've fixed these tags.
MissingCSAA (2017-08-17 17:54:43+00:00): Shocking no one, you're wrong

http://bouldercityreview.com/news/where-s-boulevard-new-sign-over-interstate-misnames-roadway
SomeoneElse_Revert (2017-09-01 09:08:38+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 51637105 where the changeset comment is: Reverting duplicated test data in Brazil (with street names of dubious provenance).
AlfredoSP (2017-10-14 20:29:17+00:00): il sentiero esiste e fa parte della Rete Escursionistica Ligure, in future se non si trova un sentiero aggiungere un tag con obstruction ma non cancellare. In questa zona si mappa tutti da rilievi sul campo e non da immagini satellitari
rskedgell (2025-08-30 14:56:18+00:00): No, it isn't. It's not signed as a Home Zone and it's not residential.
geri-oc (2019-02-14 08:58:21+00:00): Du hattes auf grade1 umgestellt und gravel.

gravel wäre aber grade2 - surface=asphalt oder beton wäre grade1

Siehe auch note: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1349721#map=13/50.7642/13.7293&layers=N

Gruß - jetzt leider nicht mehr im Gebirge - von Gerd.
wanderer52 (2019-02-14 11:27:57+00:00): Bitte um Vergebung, wenn ich "osm-technisch" nicht perfekt bin (und mich u.a. wundere: warum sehe ich diese Rückfrage NICHT in meinem osm-Profil unter "Nachrichten"?). Zum konkreten Anliegen:
(i) Es fällt mir schwer, KONKRET auf ein Detail einzugehen, dass ich unmittelbar nach eigener Begehung VOR SEHR LANGER Zeit in OSM eingetragen habe. (ii) Woran ich mich dunkel erinnere: Nein, Asphalt/Beton gibt's da wirklich nicht, wohl aber sehr festen Schotter, der sich aber zwischen Straßen-Stück A, B, C so grundsätzlich unterscheidet, dass ich wohl ein bestimmtes Stück A qualitativ von den anderen abgrenzen wollte. (iii) Da mag es vorkommen, dass man etwas als grade-1 klassifiziert, WEIL ringsum schon alles andere mit grade-2 und -3 eingestuft ist - und man zwar das eine als besser ausgebaut hervorheben will, natürlich aber ohne deshalb das ganze Umfeld zu ändern und umzustufen.
Das soll aber nur mein Handeln verständlich machen, ohne mich konkret zu rechtfertigen (dafür ist's echt zu lange her). Grüße vom wanderer52
geri-oc (2019-02-14 15:16:30+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Wandern
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:tracktype

Ok - ich ändere es heute abend zurück. Da du mit iD editierst, ist an den Schlüsseln rechts ein "i" welche zu weiteren Informationen führt.
Gruß Gerd.

PS: CS-Kommentare kommen per Nachrichtfunktion, weil nicht jeder jeden Tag in OSM ist und Nachrichten liest.
Commodoortje (2017-08-19 18:58:16+00:00): Welkom per PB gestuurd.
Commodoortje (2017-08-19 19:04:03+00:00): Het is misschien handig om te wegen dat elk wegtype al bepaalde standaard restricties heeft.
In deze wiki kun je lezen hoe de toegangsregels standaard zijn.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions#The_Netherlands
Antonio_v_S (2017-08-21 06:32:42+00:00): Okay dank je wel.
literan (2017-08-18 11:53:51+00:00): отлично церковь поправили http://demo.f4map.com/#lat=55.6511722&lon=37.3926791&zoom=17&camera.theta=53.881&camera.phi=-11.746 %-)))))))))))))
mydata_biz (2017-08-18 12:00:36+00:00): не, ну а чего )
раньше просто серая шайба лежала
надо разбираться как тегами рисовать 3д
literan (2017-08-18 14:46:51+00:00): ХХС - образец для подражания, но это нужно много человеко-часов потратить ))
mydata_biz (2017-08-18 15:26:05+00:00): да, красиво сделано
я, боюсь, такое не осилю
Yury Yatsynovich (2018-02-23 16:39:22+00:00): Остановка "Ледовый дворец" явно не на своем месте.
Yury Yatsynovich (2018-02-23 16:39:49+00:00): Я про вот эту точку: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1674193920
Jay May (2018-02-23 20:43:55+00:00): Хммм ... Не помню что-бы я когда-то трогал остановки в Молодечне ... тогда даже не понимаю об чём вы говорите :)
Yury Yatsynovich (2018-02-23 21:02:58+00:00): Да, странно: история правок говорит, что эта точка была смещена именно в результате ваших правок 6 месяцев тому, до этого она находилась на правильном месте...
Кроме смещения вы еще добавили ей тэг amenity=waste_disposal.
История правок тут: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1674193920/history
Jay May (2018-02-23 21:50:36+00:00): ??? Я даже не знал, что такой тэг вообще есть! ... ну, странно, странно...
whb (2017-08-18 13:17:58+00:00): Gibt es diesen Weg wirklich nicht mehr?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/35321687/history
MKnight (2017-08-20 09:15:53+00:00): Zumindest vor einem Jahr war er noch deutlich zu erkennen: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo&pKey=3PsAueTxQqMP1yrRTG5Xrw&lat=49.30813038&lng=8.79294595&z=17&x=0.6504092241351302&y=0.6051526983924913&zoom=1.301989150090416

...
whb (2017-08-23 10:10:43+00:00): Habe ihn wiederhergestellt:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/51369687
paas-nat (2017-08-17 15:37:27+00:00): Não tenho certeza, mas este conjunto de alterações acabou por "desmanchar" a área residencial da zona norte, que deixou de ser uma área e virou simplesmente uma linha
Felipe Alves (2017-08-29 20:37:06+00:00): Oi, Alessandra! Tudo bem?
O que quis representar aqui? Pelas imagens de satélite, não me parece ter nada nesse local.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2017-09-01 09:08:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 51637105 where the changeset comment is: Reverting duplicated test data in Brazil (with street names of dubious provenance).
rarad74 (2017-08-17 19:59:08+00:00): Buna. Mai mult ca sigur acel bistro nu este pe malul Dambovitei... Poti sa te mai uiti inca odata si sa incerci sa il pozitionezi acolo unde ar trebui sa fie?
totera (2017-08-29 00:13:34+00:00): Il tag width indica la larghezza: un valore negativo non ha senso!
Malachia (2017-08-29 15:18:56+00:00): corretto, grazie!
joost schouppe (2017-08-22 06:28:05+00:00): Hi,
Could you have a look at central Eidsdal? It looks like you duplicated roads imported by FredrikLindseth (changeset 46414668) there. See for example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/477273736#map=16/62.2625/7.1754
(I didn't look further to assess the scale of the problem)
ENTUR Johan Wiklund (2017-08-22 07:03:36+00:00): Ok I will. I ran a lot of validation so there shouldnt be that many. Something slipped through probably.
ENTUR Johan Wiklund (2017-08-22 07:13:30+00:00): Ok, i guess i was just super sloppy. Big thanks for noticing! Fixing it now.
joost schouppe (2017-08-22 11:13:52+00:00): Thanks for looking at it this quickly!
That allowed me to do the fix for this note: http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1112699
(I didn't check the route relations though)
ENTUR Johan Wiklund (2017-08-22 11:18:59+00:00): Good. I hope you had a nice trip. We followed your progress on the string of notes you left :)
joost schouppe (2017-08-22 11:33:53+00:00): Haha! I had over 250 more that I never uploaded but am fixing myself now that I'm back home.
dgitto (2017-08-17 15:57:57+00:00): benvenuto in OSM.
Se sei della zona, considera che tutte le strade sono ancora senza nome. dunque ... buon lavoro.
Imperator Lrrr (2017-09-06 14:40:32+00:00): Witaj,
Twoja zmiana nazwy ulicy jest niezgodna z zasadami nazewnictwa ulic stosowanymi w OSM.
Zapoznaj się proszę co najmniej z http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Znakowanie_dróg_w_Polsce#Tytu.C5.82owanie_znanych_postaci
JamesKingdom (2017-08-17 15:45:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 51209197 where the changeset comment is: Revert ATM in forest
trigpoint (2017-09-07 11:58:16+00:00): J21 is not called, or signposted Whetstone. If anything it is Leicester South, Why did you name it with such a name?
Commodoortje (2017-08-17 16:26:57+00:00): http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Tag:barrier=bollard?uselang=nl
Als je dit gelezen hebt zou je de overbodige tags kunnen verwijderen.
Het wordt je zeker niet kwalijk genomen. OpenStreetMap heeft een leercurve en het is een samenwerkingsproject. We moeten samenwerken om de beste kaart te maken.
SomeoneElse (2017-09-01 09:33:33+00:00): Hi James,
You may want to revisit some of the deletions in here - the DWG's had to revert the offending duplicates added in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/51210673 et al (see the discussion in there which also suggests a possible Google source of the names).
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.
Niels Elgaard Larsen (2019-08-06 18:49:20+00:00): Der er ret mange veje med

maxspeed=50,
source:maxspeed=sign

Men jeg kan ikke finde skiltene på Mapillary.

Skulle det være source:maxspeed=DK:urban ?
JamesKingdom (2017-08-17 16:12:50+00:00): Hi and welcome to OSM,
Are you sure that this bridlepath is real?
The footpath appears to be there on the right, but there is no evidence of the left side of the trail.
Thanks
Commodoortje (2017-08-17 16:22:43+00:00): Probeer je omschrijving een betere tekst mee te geven bij elke changeset, je hebt nu elke changeset dezelfde omschrijving.
Commodoortje (2017-08-17 16:24:26+00:00): Ik heb de naam Nico demuspad aangepast naar Nicodemuspad, dit is de juiste spelling.
SomeoneElse (2017-08-18 15:34:36+00:00): Hello,
Where did you get the name "Pinxton Interchange" for http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/118554994 here?
Best Regards,
Andy
DaveF (2017-08-17 19:48:33+00:00): Pulverized Ash?

Instead of deleting could you have contacted the mapper(s) to ask?
ToniE (2017-08-18 07:30:36+00:00): First guess: surface=paved or surface=paving_stones. "paved" is quite generic and should fit here?
SomeoneElse (2017-08-18 08:32:40+00:00): I've reverted this.  Please ask the mapper what "pa" was a misspelling of in each case rather than just removing data from OSM.
SomeoneElse (2017-08-18 08:31:00+00:00): Here you've removed the only useful information that was mapped.  Don't do that.
SomeoneElse (2017-08-18 15:40:31+00:00): Also,
What evidence do you have for the name of http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/16290716/history ?  I live just down the road from there and have driven around it many times.  Where is it signed?
Best Regards,
Andy
SomeoneElse (2017-08-18 08:21:14+00:00): The mapper presumably meant "source=bing" rather than "surface=ground" here.  Please engage brain when fixing tags!
SomeoneElse (2022-12-10 19:24:20+00:00): Hello,
What was the source of the junction name on https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/318483/history here?  I don't ever remember it being referred to as that, and I've driven up and down here a lot over the last 30-odd years.
Best Regards, Andy
Commodoortje (2017-08-18 04:55:21+00:00): Welkom per PB gestuurd.
Commodoortje (2017-08-18 04:56:11+00:00): Welkom op OSM.
.
MAPS.ME is helaas niet de optimale editor voor OpenStreetMap. Waardoor vervuiling kan ontstaan.
Het is eigenlijk noodzakelijk dat u de edit controleert middels JOSM, Potlatch of ID om deze vervuiling tegen te gaan.
U bent namelijk middels uw toevoeging "verantwoordelijk" voor wat u in OSM brengt.
Wij danken u voor uw begrip en we hopen dat u goede aanvullingen verricht op OSM.
Commodoortje (2017-08-18 04:56:56+00:00): Ik heb de door u aangemaakte (dubbele) adresnode samengevoegd met de bestaande adresnode.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5041456121
user_3216889 (2017-08-22 16:17:59+00:00): Bij deze door mij samengevoegd.
wille (2017-08-18 02:50:22+00:00): Oi, Diego

Tudo bem?

Muito obrigado por seu interesse em contribuir com o OpenStreetMap! Precisamos de mais colaboradores.

O OSM não é adequado para testes, mas sim para dados reais. Em suas edições você traçou ruas onde já existiam vias traçadas. Além disso, não é permitido copiar nomes de ruas de mapas comerciais como o Google Maps ou qualquer outra fonte que não tenha uma licença aberta.

Se precisar de ajuda em suas futuras edições, pode me contactar. Espero contar com sua colaboração!

Muito obrigado,
abraços,
diegomd (2017-08-18 11:51:38+00:00): Bom dia Wille,

Compreendo.

Acabei colocando o nome "teste" quando comecei a edição e esqueci de alterar quando salvei.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2017-09-01 09:08:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 51637105 where the changeset comment is: Reverting duplicated test data in Brazil (with street names of dubious provenance).
SomeoneElse (2019-01-06 12:55:24+00:00): You've added the name "Austhorpe Interchange" here.  Are you sure that it is signed?  My recollection is that it isn't.
dikkeknodel (2018-05-16 10:58:11+00:00): These changes have been reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/59013331. The wild camp sites have been enriched with additional information following a discussion in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/51210935 and input from the original contributor.
Cheers,
dikkeknodel
dikkeknodel (2018-05-15 11:47:12+00:00): Hi mboeringa,
I agree that it should be marked that these are wild camping spots. However, in the mountains it can be pretty helpful if wild camping sites are marked, since flat surfaces may be scarce. Removing them seems a bit hasty in my opinion.
camp_type=wildcamp and a description tag with the amount of tents that fit at the location would for example improve the detail in my opinion. 
Why would you just plainly remove these sites instead of start a discussion first? The changeset in which these sites were introduced (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/42344084) does not include any comments asking for these details. You could have requested user nurdafur for these details and enrich the map instead of depriving it of this information completely. 
I suggest we do this and put them back when the details are available. What are your thoughts?
Cheers,
dikkeknodel
dikkeknodel (2018-05-15 11:48:17+00:00): I meant this changeset
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/42341070
mboeringa (2018-05-15 20:37:04+00:00): Hi dikkeknodel,

A couple of thoughts here:
- The tagging of camp sites is still mildly in flux. I can't remember having seen a "camp_type=wildcamp" on the pages when I last checked them, sometime before this edit, but it now seems documented. At the time of this edit by me, with no known established tagging for marking out wildcamps, the best course of action seemed to remove them.
- I do think that tagging wildcamps without any sign, nor even note, that they are wildcamps, is kind of lazy and potentially dangerous. People may expect services (e.g. drinking water) that are not available. This is also a bit worrying coming from someone who actually must be an experienced hiker / climber to even know about, and have used, such a place to start tagging it on OSM. A regular ignorant tourist would not know about such a place at all.
- Also in this respect, while I understand the use of a subtag like "camp_type=x" is logical and much used in OSM, I do have some doubt in the case of wildcamps. Wildcamps are so totally different from any regular 'established/informal' camp site, that a separate tag might have been a better choice, e.g. tourism=wildcamp.
- This is especially so because any website / rendering not knowing about or checking the subtag "camp_type=x", may inadvertently show this on a map targeted at regular tourists without any climbing / hiking experience. This could lead to unpleasant situations and at the very least confusion.

Anyway, it is OSM, so if you want to revert this,you can do it. But as you suggested, I would definetely tag them as "camp_type=wildcamp". Lastly, it might be good to have the actual locations double-checked locally before reverting this. I am definitely not in a position to do that, but don't know your location, or if you have contacts with local mappers and hikers that know the locations and paths leading to them. I do have some doubts about re-adding these without a double check if the locations are actually sound.
dikkeknodel (2018-05-16 09:06:38+00:00): Hi mboeringa,
I think your concerns are valid, although the same user also tagged drinking water sources in the immediate surrounding area. 
The wild_camping tagging is introduced on the Tag:tourism=camp_site wiki page at 19-04-2017, so it is fairly new. I did not know it until I found similar camp_sites in another changeset that were actually having 4 stars assigned :-S:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/34252985
By commenting that changeset I reached out to the user actually visiting the area and we worked together to enrich the map. 
Off course we are not tagging for the renderer, which naturally lags in implemented new tagging. This is also where the personal responsibility of the user of the data comes in. Having a map does not take away personal responsibilities of people going into the mountains. 
Hence I still doubt the action you took. A comment in the changeset introducing these camp sites would have quickly resolved these issues. It would have actually enriched the data, while now you more or less bluntly removed it.
By coincidence I've met user nurdarfur in person, this user mainly maps while on the go (which is also described in his OSM profile for anybody to read) and which is hinted to because Vespucci is mainly used. So I'm 99% sure this was personally surveyed before entered (this is also mentioned as source in the changeset). Additionally, replies from nurdafur are typically very quick, but if you don't try to send a comment, you won't get a reply either.
As an avid mountain hiker and wild camper, I am very welcoming to information about wild camping sites, hence the persistence :-).
So my main point is that it was premature to just remove these sites from the armchair without discussion with the mapper introducing the POIs or survey on location. 
I will contact nurdafur and then revert and enrich the data.
Cheers,
dikkeknodel
mboeringa (2018-05-16 09:29:25+00:00): Hi dikkeknodel,

Thanks for the detailed reply that explains more about the situation and background of these edits. I am fine if you revert this and enrich the data using the wildcamp tagging.

Cheers, Marco
nurdafur (2018-05-16 09:38:40+00:00): Hallo Marco and dikkeknodel

I map only places far away from any road or track and with drinking water close by as Campsites. As it seems, I forgot to set a tag which makes them clear to be non official camp-sites e.g. bivac.
cheers
Urs
dikkeknodel (2018-05-16 10:26:30+00:00): The revert:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/59012299
The enrichment:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/59012400
cquest (2017-08-26 22:58:18+00:00): La convention en France est de ne mettre que le nom en français dans le tag name=*
Pour les langues régionales, locales ou étrangères, elles sont mises dans name:XX=*, name:oc pour l'occitan.
Merci de ne plus faire de modification sur name=* et si besoin de venir en discuter sur https://forum.openstreetmap.fr/
Supaplex (2017-10-01 18:47:57+00:00): 恭喜您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。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

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!
matt_ellery (2017-08-19 11:22:05+00:00): Hello Dave, thank you for your contributions and welcome to OpenStreetMap. 

Regarding the bus stop (node 5041516821) - there is an existing bus stop just to the south on the northbound side of Bury Road. Is there more than one bus stop going north? If not I'd suggest editing the existing node rather than creating a duplicate.
cquest (2017-08-26 22:58:13+00:00): La convention en France est de ne mettre que le nom en français dans le tag name=*
Pour les langues régionales, locales ou étrangères, elles sont mises dans name:XX=*, name:oc pour l'occitan.
Merci de ne plus faire de modification sur name=* et si besoin de venir en discuter sur https://forum.openstreetmap.fr/
frosm (2019-02-11 00:47:59+00:00): bonjourm
à propos de https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/516452635
qu'est-ce que c'est ?
un bâtiment servant de lieu de stockage ?
muralito (2017-08-18 03:20:48+00:00): Mary, no datos personales por favor. Podes poner direcciones completas, calle, numero de puerta, etc, pero no quien vive.
muralito (2017-08-18 03:21:47+00:00): Si queres guardar datos privados personales, el maps.me te lo hace, pero es otra la funcion, no como hiciste con esto.
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-25 17:34:28+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/516457477/history has waterway = creek that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)
What you meant by waterway=creek? Is not using https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Dstream intentional and wanted here? How waterway=creek differs from waterway=stream in this case?
Jacek79 (2024-04-25 20:43:47+00:00): The only thing I can say is that a "Balje" (or "Priel") translates to "tidal creek".
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-25 21:47:57+00:00): would https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Dtidal_channel work well here?
Jacek79 (2024-04-26 22:29:27+00:00): Possibly yes. Unfortunately, it didn't exist yet when I mapped the Swinnbalje.
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-29 11:32:40+00:00): I guess that creating note could make sense? It is definitely not a "creek"  or "stream" from what I see
Rodrigo Rega (2017-08-17 21:34:18+00:00): Los cruceros se deben mapear como "historic=wayside_cross" en vez de como "amenity=place_of_worship". He corregido los dos que se añadieron en esta edición.

Gracias por tu trabajo, un saludo.
DeLouredo (2017-08-18 08:21:42+00:00): Yo estoy comenzando y agradezco estas revisiones y comentarios. Muchísimas gracias. GRACIÑAS.
Lamichhane (2020-01-05 15:36:01+00:00): hi, thank you for mapping Gyadi area. the road you created is a tertiary( which connect the major village of parbat district to its headquater.
Polarbear-repair (2017-08-21 21:42:26+00:00): Hi Jakka, if this is a community_centre, please use amenity=community_centre. 
"juvenile" is the target group, you would use that as community_centre:for=juvenile

See here: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Acommunity_centre
thanks
5m4u9 (2017-08-18 19:38:49+00:00): hola, gracias por contribuir en el mapa.

este lugar historico nos hacía falta!
joyma (2017-08-18 06:32:21+00:00): Hi I added this Sustainable Drainage Retention Pond as it's just been built in my village. You've removed it. Why?
Hjart (2017-08-17 19:54:12+00:00): Velkommen til vores projekt og tak for dine bidrag.
Pas dog helst på ikke at rykke ved adresser. Du har her blandet ikke mindre end 4 styk sammen
Kjaehr (2017-08-17 20:02:29+00:00): Der er noget jeg skal få styr på, tak for info