piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
JessAk71 (2022-05-23 16:13:04+00:00): Hi jmapb, if I remember correctly it was originally a multipolygon with Building B and when I separated them into distinct structures I must have left the multipolygon tag on Building A by mistake. So no real reason for it it can be updated to a normal building if you like.
AndresDuhour (2021-12-30 18:06:28+00:00): Buenas tardes! estaba revisando calles con nombres abreviados y encuentro la calle E. Nervi, que antes de llamaba Calle 8. Usted sabrá a qué nombre corresponde la E? Gracias!!
Frans S (2021-09-30 14:44:31+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and  mapped. Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111918655
SomeoneElse (2021-09-30 13:47:36+00:00): It may be that at this point the AONB should be defined in terms of the stream or the admin boundary, in which case the "other" bit is wrong and this link isn't needed.
marczoutendijk (2021-12-08 12:58:20+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114702419 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert of vandalism.
Ebrahim Nejati (2021-11-03 11:34:52+00:00): دوست عزیز لطفا دعواهای خود را وارد نقشه نکنید
Frans S (2021-09-30 14:41:11+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and  mapped.
Be sure it is a building (Check for roof, shadow) you map. You mapped a tree as a building.
The shadow of a building limits also the width/lenght of a building.don't map it larger.
 Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111919017
Frans S (2021-09-30 14:37:01+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and  mapped.
Please pay more attention on accurate mapping.  Follow the roofline including the extentions of a building and don't include to much green.
Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111919035
Frans S (2021-09-30 14:34:47+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Please pay attention on these points. 
Square each rectangular building.

FYI Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0

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 !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111919085
kasmar00 (2021-10-03 16:24:55+00:00): Hej, dlaczego sugerujesz że zmiana "n/ż" na "nż." to "mniej błędów"? O jakie błędy chodzi? W Poznaniu stosowany jest zapis właśnie "n/ż"
Frans S (2021-09-30 14:43:28+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and  mapped. 
Check for a shadow when you map a building in the open area. No shadow? No building. A shadow proofs that the object is above ground level.
Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111919157
Frans S (2021-09-30 14:33:30+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Please pay attention on these points. 
A: square all rectangular buildings with the Q key.
B: Your mapping of the big square includes the yard next to the building.  You mapped a building of 17 x 17 mtr, despite the building should be 4 x 4 meter. (it takes time to "read"an image to see what has to be mapped and how,)

FYI Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0

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 !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111919164
eggie (2023-07-25 20:25:20+00:00): Hoi Peter,
Wel of niet laten staan het pad? Het is me nooit opgevallen dat er een olifantenpaadje loopt, maar ik fiets daar vaak langs zonder op jouw paadje te letten moet ik zeggen. 
De officiële route kan ik wel omleggen, maar ik denk dat het melder om het wel of niet bestaande olifantenpaadje te doen is.
Wil er ook wel even langsfietsen voordat ik evt iets aanpas. 
In de praktijk zullen wandelaars wel afsnijden door het gras.
Zie https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3799167#map=19/51.71240/4.63928&layers=N

MVG
eggie
Peter Elderson (2023-07-25 21:05:41+00:00): Hoi Eggie,

Ik kan me hier weinig meer van herinneren, maar ik denk dat het paadje nu inderdaad niet (meer) bestaat. Er lijkt ook geen Streekpadwandeling meer over de brug te gaan, volgens de Wandelnetsite. Maar dat zou op de weg bekeken moeten worden. Ik kom er helaas voorlopig niet, ik wandel in weekeinden het Roots Natuurpad, en verder in de vakanties Italie, delen van de Via Francigena, de E2 en de Cammino.
eggie (2023-07-26 06:05:03+00:00): Oke... zal er wel even langsfietsen als het droog wordt en evt.. die route voorlopig omleggen als het pad is verdwenen.
Wandelse verder...
eggie
eggie (2023-07-26 07:29:47+00:00): Medemapper Kaartmapper was al ter plaatse geweest en heeft niets aangetroffen dat op een pad lijkt. Ik heb de 'wandelroute' maar voorlopig omgelegd en het 'paadje' verwijderd.
Groet
eggie
Peter Elderson (2023-07-26 08:08:53+00:00): Prima! Ik heb nog s gekeken en die ooit aangekondigde dagwandeling bestaat gewoon niet. Het deel bij Strijensas is een gemarkeerde rondwandeling, die aansluit op de hoofdroute van het Biesbospad. Ik zal de relatie aanpassen.
eggie (2023-07-26 08:18:45+00:00): Top!
Want aan de noordzijde van de brug loopt de wandeling ook wonderlijk. 
Daar is overigens wel een steil olifantenpaadje waar sportvissers gebruik van maken.
Peter Elderson (2023-07-26 08:52:03+00:00): Streetview juli 2023 laat daar ook een wandelpaaltje zien, al zie ik niet hoe je door het struikgewas moet komen! Maar volgens de wandelplanner van Wandelnet is het zelfs een wandelknooppunt.
eggie (2023-07-26 10:19:17+00:00): Zal straks als het droog blijft wel eens kijken naar dat wandelknooppunt gebeuren. 
Woon er vlak bij
Er is nu aan het Oostelijke fietspad een trap met een info bord. Neem aan dat de knooppuntroute 23 24 daar over loopt? 
Tussen het fietspad en het 'natuurgebiedje" ligt een hek met overstappen. Dat dient om de reeën te stoppen als ze oversteekplannen hebben.
Je kunt op meer plaatsen er overheen via zo'n zigzag overstap.
Peter Elderson (2023-07-26 10:33:38+00:00): Voor zover ik kan bekijken loopt 23-24 onder de brug door en blijft dan beneden, dus niet naar het oostelijke fietspad. Het lijkt erop (en daar ben ik helemaal vóór) dat er geen wandelverbindingen meer over de Moerdijkbrug lopen. Alles gaat via het pontje Strijensas-Moerdijk.
eggie (2023-07-26 12:13:26+00:00): Klopt....   Ben er  net  nog op de fiets geweest. Knooppunt 24 staat goed, maar de route loopt tot het gemaaltje over het oostelijke fietspad en gaat dan via de trap  naar het natuurgebied.  Zal het straks even aanpassen. Er loopt geen pad over de dijk. 
Dat Veer Strijensas - Moerdijk vaart overigens niet heel het jaar. 
Groet,
eggie
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:04:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
habi (2023-01-17 16:59:02+00:00): Ciao ridersnotebook

Du hast hier bei fast allen Gemeindeverwaltungen `image`s hinzugefügt, die oftmals nicht die Gemeindeverwaltung zeigen.
Aus meiner Sicht macht das wenig Sinn, denn der Image-Tag sollte das eingetragene Objekt zeigen.

Ich werde versuchen, diese Tags nadisna zu entfernen.

Gruess usem Liebifäud,
habi
Mathias_ADAV5962 (2021-10-04 14:28:55+00:00): Hello, i update this relation with this information, more particulary between Quesnoy-sur-Deule and Warneton. 

https://izi.travel/fr/96e8-carre-bleu/fr

One person from Eurometropole told me that it was the good one, but i did not get the opportunity to try it.
Ze0zohk1 (2021-10-03 13:25:15+00:00): Hallo WanderNuss,

die Relation "Fleggaweg Degerloch" scheint so nicht ganz richtig zu sein. Es gibt ein paar Lücken im Verlauf. Die kannst du am einfachsten im Relations-Editor in JOSM finden. Einfach mal im Relations-Editor Rechtsklick auf eine Weg machen und dann "Nächste Lücke finden" auwählen. Alternativ kannst du hier schauen: https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Help/Dialog/RelationEditor

Und es sieht so aus, als sollte der Weg https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/14162753 geteilt werden und nur das eine Segment Teil der Relation sein. 

Außerdem sind Start- und Endpunkt nicht identisch. Kann sein, dass das das gleiche Problem ist wie bei Wg 14162753 (-> Sprich: Zu "viel" Weg ist Teil der Relation).

Ich habe nicht im Detail geschaut, ob das so aus deinem Edit kommt oder nicht. Aber wenn du einen Track hast, könntest du anhand deines Tracks auch noch korrigieren.

Ich hoffe, dass dir das weiterhilft. Bei (Rück-)Fragen helfe ich gerne weiter.

Viele Grüße
Ze0zohk1
AntMadeira (2021-10-04 11:18:53+00:00): Olá, Silverkinght.
Vi que alteraste esta estrada de terciária para secundária, mas trata-se de um caminho municipal.
Podes indicar por que razão fizeste essa alteração?
A padronização das estradas em Portugal é esta:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Portugal/Padroniza%C3%A7%C3%A3o#Estradas

Qualquer dúvida, estou ao dispor.

Cumprimentos,
António Madeira.
SilverKnight (2021-10-08 12:24:22+00:00): Olá, AntMadeira
Eu já alterei a estrada secundária para estrada terciária por se tratar de um caminho municipal, obrigado pela informação.
AntMadeira (2021-10-08 13:10:38+00:00): Obrigado.
AntMadeira (2021-10-04 11:21:12+00:00): Olá, Silverkinght.
Pergunto-te o mesmo que perguntei aqui:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/111921076

Cumprimentos,
António Madeira.
gpserror (2021-10-06 08:05:15+00:00): Hi, I've been auditing roundabouts and noticed that this roundabout at 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/988347236 seems to be one wayed clockwise which isn't typical in the USA.  Could you fix it (reverse the direction of the way) when you get a chance, or let me know if perhaps people really should be taking a left when entering the roundabout?
zluuzki (2021-10-17 10:29:02+00:00): Fixed, thanks for letting me know!
neuhausr (2021-10-01 19:30:40+00:00): Hi, I was curious why you deleted the proposed Bottineau LRT line--not clear from your changeset comment
SpeedMcCool (2021-10-01 20:05:01+00:00): @neuhausr. My bad. I should've included a note about that in the changeset notes.

The Bottineau LRT is no longer planned for that route. The alignment in the BNSF railroad corridor and along Olson Mem Hwy has been abandoned. https://www.mprnews.org/story/2021/03/11/planners-rethink-bottineau-light-rail-line-in-wake-of-rail-dispute
A67-A67 (2021-09-30 21:46:05+00:00): Het was getagd als motorroad=no. Motorroad=no geeft aan dat het geen autoweg is. 

Daarnaast komt de combinatie highway=trunk, motorroad=no (betekenis: Onderbreking in auto(snel)weg) volgens mij precies overeen met de situatie ter plekke.

Zie ook: 
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:The_Netherlands_roads_tagging#Auto.28snel.29wegen
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:motorroad%3Dno
Josbert Lonnee (2021-10-01 01:00:33+00:00): En hier:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrunk
Staat dan weer: "highway=trunk is always used in combination with motorroad=*." Dus is het dan OK als er expliciet "motorroad=no" bij staat? Maar dat is default al "no". Vandaar mijn opvatting.
A67-A67 (2021-10-01 18:34:43+00:00): Ja, motorroad=* betekent een motorroad-tag, bijv. motorroad=yes of motorroad=no.

Bij het kopje International equivalence van de pagina over highway=trunk staat een link naar de pagina NL:The Netherlands roads tagging#Auto(snel)wegen voor verdere uitleg van de Nederlandse situatie. Op die pagina staat de betekenis van beide combinaties van highway=trunk met motorroad=*:
- highway=trunk, motorroad=yes: autoweg
- highway=trunk, motorroad=no: onderbreking in auto(snel)weg

Voor zover ik weet is die combinatie highway=trunk, motorroad=no in de Nederlandse situatie precies bedacht voor situatie als deze, waarbij de autowegstatus kort onderbroken wordt bij gelijkvloerse kruisingen.
Josbert Lonnee (2021-10-01 19:49:39+00:00): Ok, klinkt goed en correct. Wil je dat ik het weer terug verander?
A67-A67 (2021-10-02 22:56:33+00:00): Dat lijkt me wel het beste.
dieterdreist (2021-10-01 21:49:35+00:00): se ora è un cantiere sarebbe da mettere il tag landuse=construction alla way di contorno
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:02:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:00:12+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 21:58:16+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
Ser9ei (2021-10-01 00:14:58+00:00): Всё это выглядит очень странно. Как минимум надо убрать острые углы. Таких поворотов на трассе быть не может. А есть схема развязки? Откуда информация?
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:00:10+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
luiswoo (2021-09-30 16:17:36+00:00): Зайдём с другого бока. По умолчанию у дороги в OSM есть тротуар, и без запрета по ней ходить (foot=no или ещё как) маршрут будет таким https://disk.yandex.ru/i/UH9meMY8RaOtUQ
Если это вообще волнует.
SomeoneElse2 (2022-12-01 11:32:56+00:00): Your change to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/3753061/history .  This doesn't look to me another like a regular amenity=parking at all.  It's likely an area of hard standing used for dropping off crops to be collected (e.g. historically beet for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Sugar in Peterborough) or storing anything before spreading on fields.  
Making armchair changes such as this significantly REDUCES the quality of OpenStreetMap - don't do it.
user_8101879 (2022-12-07 19:42:15+00:00): According to Maxar and Esri imagery (2020 april), there is nothing here but earth.
My changed tried to improved the use of this area and you are possibly right, maybe it is not a parking, But you are truly wrong : no concrete but earth so, if it is not a parking, it means it is nothing.
So I have deleted this useless area (created 15 years ago) and created a farmland area next to it, a more interesting improvement of this part of the world.
Best regards
ChristianA (2022-02-23 06:14:53+00:00): Har detta vindskydd byggts upp igen? Det brann ju för ett par år sedan...?
Smollett (2021-10-01 16:56:34+00:00): Не тяните, пожялуйста, вслепую из ЕГРН всякий мусор.
Кому-то приходится за вами исправлять, а остальное так и остается висеть
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/170999388/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/450538281
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/622696650
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/102268702
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/38536167
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/99451129
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/99451129
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/38536167
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/402607092
Lee Carré (2021-10-01 10:22:18+00:00): Smaller changeset areas, please.
Lee Carré (2021-10-01 10:30:40+00:00): What makes for http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments 🙂.
SK53 (2021-09-30 16:28:36+00:00): agggh, accidentally started on St Michaels near St Fagans (not completely used again to PL3's changeset cf iD)
Rogoyski (2021-10-06 18:54:12+00:00): Syntex who edited the cycleway in al. Wilanowska before you believes - as many mappers in fact - that as long as there is no physical separation between the pedestrian and bicycle part of a way but merely a painted line there should only be one highway=* feature in OSM. 

I'm not going to defend any position here, but would however like to remind you that if you had drawn a separate feature for the footway, you should have also removed things like foot=designated, bicycle=designated and segregated=yes from the cycleway feature.
ozgurakyazi (2021-09-30 16:16:57+00:00): Sorry there is no access in the direction of south. One way access to the direction of Kronberg.
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-02-08 12:10:49+00:00): Thanks for adding them!

Though descriptions go into description tag, not name tag (I will fix it)
Semukhin (2022-02-09 05:11:39+00:00): I wrote the title from the sticker to the name tag. But yeah, you are right, description tag is more appropriate. Thanks!
mariotomo (2021-09-30 17:13:20+00:00): hola y bienvenidos a OSM. the Wiki has quite a few useful resources for beginners, if you're interested to contribute more information to the map. (names are meant for given names, not for descriptions, if you want your enterprise to be found, the best way is to categorize it correctly.)
Luzandro (2022-12-02 15:02:16+00:00): Hi,

please stop making incorrect changes to agricultural=yes, I already told you once that it has a different meaning than vehicle=agricultural

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/106546431

see also the given example in the wiki: "_not_ agricultural=yes but vehicle=agricultural"

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:agricultural
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111926049
richard-57 (2021-10-01 07:03:52+00:00): Unfortunately this is incorrect. The land within the gap which has been filled by cemetary is not cemetary land. It is private wasteland
BCNorwich (2021-10-01 08:21:00+00:00): Sorry, my mistake.
czubi (2021-10-01 15:13:55+00:00): Prima!.
Bitte nochmal nach surface schauen.
surface=Stein gibt es nicht. Bei den Treppen...
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:surface
NieWnen (2021-10-01 15:14:34+00:00): To nie jest ścieżka rowerowa. Wycofane.
Carlos290Eduardo (2021-09-30 17:17:35+00:00): Sergipe.
PT-53 (2021-10-05 07:23:12+00:00): Siehe Kommentar bei
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/112090824#map=19/48.18314/9.90979
SomeoneElse2 (2022-09-21 00:12:31+00:00): Hello,
Is the path to the north of Sainsburys at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/988383309/history really a public footpath?  It seems unlikely, unless it's some sort of historic route through what is now a shopping centre.
Best Regards,
Andy
ohmanger (2022-09-21 11:56:31+00:00): I'm fairly sure that way was split from https://osm.org/way/23712583 so the designation tag was left over from that (my bad). The tunnel at the south is public so I suspect a historic route that is redirected.

I'll do another survey to check.
KartoGrapHiti (2021-10-04 07:01:20+00:00): Ist dort wirklich ein Radfahrstreifen auf der Fahrbahn? Im Mai war weder der Radfahrstreifen noch Bauarbeiten dafür zu sehen: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1116581862166463
Ser9ei (2021-10-01 15:09:20+00:00): Хорошо бы ещё добавлять как минимум теги типа перехода светофор (crossing=traffic_signals) или нерегулируемый (crossing=uncontrolled). А ещё лучше и остальные параметры см. wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Key:crossing
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111928973
A Hall (2022-03-17 20:08:36+00:00): Just a heads up, you should avoid attaching landuses to boundaries at all costs. It can lead to downstream mistakes in moving boundaries and makes it hard to cleanup/adjust. Otherwise, I'm a huge fan of your work and keep it up!
Cabot's Underhill (2022-03-18 13:27:41+00:00): Sorry about that. Someone else had mentioned the same issue and I thought I had unconnected them but clearly not. Thank you!
itchybellybutton (2021-10-02 11:36:54+00:00): Hi enriwi93 und willkommen auf OpenStreetMap! 

Bei diesem Änderungssatz sind dir ein paar Fehler unterlaufen. Zum einen bekommt ein Haus kein "name" Attribute, nur weil dort eine Firma ansässig ist. Wenn du eine Firma hinzufügen möchtest, empfiehlt es sich eher ein Punkt zusetzen mit entsprechenden Tags wie "office". Des Weiteren hast du ein Punkt einer Baumreihe verschoben, wodurch die Baumreihe über den gesamten Packhof geht. Auf Grund des letzten Punktes habe ich die Änderung rückgängig gemacht. Wenn du Hilfe benötigst, kannst du mich gerne anschreiben. 
Ansonsten viel Spaß bei OSM!
syntex (2021-09-30 21:23:17+00:00): Wyprzedziłeś
Harry Wood (2021-11-25 14:50:24+00:00): Are these the toilets inside the pub? (level=1)
okwithmydecay (2021-11-25 14:57:44+00:00): No, these were separate and below it so I may have tagged the level wrong
Jakka (2021-09-30 19:26:04+00:00): apotheek is https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity=pharmacy
complete_gth (2021-09-30 19:39:37+00:00): Moin, es scheint als hättest du building=yes vergessen :) .
Murcik (2021-10-01 07:51:49+00:00): У этого здания нет собственного названия. Не надо его выдумывать.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/525331269
Собственное имя у станции, а не у здания.