piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-06-09 10:52:25+00:00): Please don't put a building inside a building.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122044955
Wilmer Osario (2022-06-06 23:50:18+00:00): Bienvenido y muchas gracias por mejorar el mapa 👍.

Lo mejoraré para adaptarlo a los estándares de OpenStreetMap.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-06-09 10:51:11+00:00): Use the shortcut to square corners
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122045200
SomeoneElse (2022-06-06 22:27:22+00:00): Your most recent edit was to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/938865427/history .  A previous mapper said "Prospect: landslide has removed part of the road. There seems no intention to repair it. El Paso: there is a gate across the road".  Can you explain how come the landslide is no longer there?
You also moved https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9728853959 some distance from the large building that it was outside.
SomeoneElse (2022-06-06 22:31:05+00:00): Also https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/553367462 is now very offset from any imagery,
Funnynick (2022-06-06 23:15:55+00:00): I didnt know about the landslide. 
my bad
SomeoneElse (2022-06-07 00:01:28+00:00): So why did you say "this is not a dead end"?
user_5359 (2022-06-09 15:05:43+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on http://www.osm.org/way/913963756. What is the meaning of the tag Relation = Validator?
Leonardo Gutierrez (2025-12-08 17:23:11+00:00): I apologize for not responding to this comment in the past; the tag has since been removed.
mueschel (2022-06-07 10:02:33+00:00): Hallo,
bitte verwende keine Keys mit Leerzeichen oder anderen Sonderzeichen, z.B. dist:blue +red

Wenn dort zwei gleiche Distanzen sind, dann müssen zwei getrennte Keys verwendet werden, dist:blue und dist:red in diesem Fall.
DeFra85 (2022-06-07 12:29:58+00:00): Ah okay, danke für den Hinweis. Ich ändere die Angeben dementsprechend.
Diese Option wurde mir wohl fälschlicherweise so vom Programm angeboten. Wahrscheinlich weil andere das so oft falsch benutzt haben.
DeFra85 (2022-06-07 12:54:51+00:00): Habe hier im Note leider den falschen Golfclub genannt.

Beim echten "Golfclub am Heerhof" ist das mit den Sonderzeichen leider noch extremer.
Die haben auch einen 9-Loch-Platz, behalten jedoch die Farbkennung bei der zweiten Runde bei wechseln aber dafür die Position BLAU (https://golf-am-heerhof.de/platz/scorekarte/), sodass es für dist:blue= eine Doppelnennung gebe.

ich würde die Positionen weiter mit einem + schreiben, aber OHNE Leerzeichen. Ginge das?
DeFra85 (2022-06-07 12:56:12+00:00): also tee=yellow+blue , dist:yellow+blue= , tee=blue+red , dist:blue+red=
mueschel (2022-06-07 13:17:18+00:00): Das Trennzeichen für mehrere Werte ist das Semikolon, für Keys gibt es die Möglichkeit nicht. Also

tee=yellow;blue
dist:yellow = 100
dist:blue = 100
MaGIStokrat (2022-06-07 12:25:32+00:00): Hallo TaurusCB und willkommen bei Openstreetmap.

Deinem Account zufolge bist Du erst seit kurzem dabei, hast jedoch um keine Überprüfung deiner Edits gebeten.

Da doch einiges auffällig ist, wäre es  besser es dennoch rechtzeitig zu klären.

Du hast den Glasübergang als Gebäude gelöscht und neu gesetzt, dazu die PPl-Zufahrt.

Problem: üblich werden vorh. Objekte genutzt und angepasst wenn immer möglich (wegen der History). Nun sind viele Zusatzdaten zum Gebäude/Übergang futsch (eben Glasüberbau), insbes. für 3D Darstellungen wie bei (falls noch nicht aktualisiert) :
https://demo.f4map.com/#lat=51.7526702&lon=14.3447386&zoom=20&camera.theta=59.897&camera.phi=-6.016

Die Sporthalle hat an der Südwand noch einen "Zacken" dazu bekommen.

Daneben wären die Attribute der Straße im Durchbruch besser "tunnel=building_passage" und nicht bridge, layer -1 ist verzichtbar, der Straßenbelag wäre schön zu wissen, zudem die Zufahrtssrechte (access=...) für PPl + Straße. Gilt auch für die Wege.

Es gibt also einiges, was man korrigieren sollte.

Bei Fragen ruhig fragen.

Gruß MaGIStokrat
mueschel (2022-06-21 10:18:30+00:00): Hi,
welcome to OSM!
I found some strange tags on the objects you added like these:
historic = first_petroglyph_of_this_trail.
historic trail = *
These might be good descriptions of the objects, but are not usable like this in OSM.

In OSM we have to use a well-defined set of tags to allow all the software tools to understand the data and e.g. show it on maps.
Please make sure that you only use tags that are documented in the Wiki or are available as presets in your editor.


Jan
Josef73 (2022-11-01 18:12:18+00:00): Hello, can you check the value of the tag opening_hours for "Black Lodge Coffee Roasters"? Thanks.
MaGIStokrat (2022-06-07 12:43:51+00:00): Hallo TaurusCB,

auch hier eine kl. Anmerkung.

Versuche, wenn möglich, Objekt zu begradigen/symmetrieren/in Fluchten darzustellen.
Ich weiß nicht, ob ID 2.20 so etwas bietet, aber so ließen sich windschiefe Wege/Flächen(Gebäude) etc. vermeiden.
Hier sieht dann doch einiges krumm, mehr nach "Augenmaß" aus.

Zudem sollten Flächen (wie Wiese) nicht eine direkte/gemeinsame Kante mit Wegen und dgl. haben. Das erschwert eine zukünftige Bearbeitung. Bei Gebäuden ist das (mE) nicht so wild.

Bei Grundstücken mit Grenzen/Zäunen/Mauern wäre es zudem vorteilhaft, diese Grenze mit einzutragen inkl. Zugängen wie Toren/Tür etc. Damit lassen sich wie hier bei der Schule (wie südl. vom Flügel B) die nicht öffentlichen Bereiche definieren und trennen.

Gruß MaGIStokrat
pitscheplatsch (2022-07-29 17:07:39+00:00): Hi Quinta,

I am curious, is this some kind of data import or what's the source of your mapping? Thanks.

Best,
Pascal
Quinta (2022-07-31 17:02:13+00:00): Hi Pascal,
I am interested in GIS INDOOR MAPPING and did some rough OSM testing to upload a floor plan of my school building. I will study how it is being done in the OSM community to be able to upload all the buildings of my university (Castilla-La Mancha). I have obtained the plans in dwg format and have converted them to shp format.
If you know anything about the subject, I would appreciate your advice.

Thanks for your attention

Cheers
pitscheplatsch (2022-07-31 18:23:28+00:00): Quinta, thanks for your answer.

As you maybe already know, your changeset has been reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/122752966

Did you get any information why your map edits have been reverted?
jeslop (2022-07-31 18:33:13+00:00): Hi pitscheplatsch. All info about revert  (in spanish) is here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/122519589
Quinta was informed.

Jesús López 
OpenStreetMap Foundation 
Data Working Group
pitscheplatsch (2022-07-31 18:40:19+00:00): @Jesús Thanks!
Fizzie-DWG (2022-07-06 00:50:47+00:00): Hi Bart. Thanks for your work in updating the map, but I have a question for you. You've added the name "For the love of hair" to the Mackay Police Station, which doesn't seem quite right! :-) Is that correct, or should it possibly be in the block next door? Thanks, Fizzie
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-09-15 15:33:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 126228183, 126229776, 126229784 where the changeset comment is: Reverting edits; see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6330 ; subsequent actions by that user suggest this data is likely fantasy.
Trevor_1 (2022-06-07 01:23:47+00:00): You're making the ramps too long. Please wait until we discuss this more.
mkopinsky (2023-10-05 15:24:37+00:00): This changeset added two 672 Giddings Streets. Do you know which one is correct, or what the other one should be?
Tyler Hermanson (2023-10-13 02:49:00+00:00): apologies, good catch. i just fixed it. the east house is 656 the west house is 672
nevw (2022-06-07 05:32:28+00:00): Hi
place=isolated_dwelling is not the correct tag for a house name.
addr:housename=xyz is the correct tag.
See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr
nevw (2022-06-07 05:36:15+00:00): You would add the tag to the outline way of the house instead of a node as the building outline is already mapped.
woodpeck (2022-06-09 08:33:09+00:00): Dear 1T-Money, please explain why you fully reverted changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/122047673 in this edit and why you didn't see fit to explain your reasons in the changeset comment right away. 

In the future, when making wholesale reverts of the work of others, please ALWAYS give sufficient reason in your changeset comment.
Trevor_1 (2022-06-09 11:53:18+00:00): Hi, I reverted it because his edits were sloppy and made the accuracy worse. He wasn't actually "fixing" anything. There were sharp kinks in the road, and the ramps were too long, against the guidelines for them to start near the "gore" point. We discussed this on Slack, and others agreed with me. I meant to explain in the changeset comment, but I was tired and got distracted. I'll make sure to do that in the future.
Trevor_1 (2022-06-09 12:05:09+00:00): *Others agreed with me that there were sharp kinks in the road and that the ramps were too long
Trevor_1 (2022-06-09 12:10:21+00:00): * I had also asked him to wait until we discussed this more, but he ignored it. He's generally uncooperative
Trevor_1 (2022-06-09 15:15:28+00:00): One more thing: I actually reverted all 9 of the changesets by txemt that said "Fixing PGBT" in this changeset, because he wasn't "fixing" it, he was making it worse. I'll make sure to add that in the changeset description next time.
Trevor_1 (2022-06-09 16:58:30+00:00): I didn't mean that to sound antagonistic, sorry if it did
woodpeck (2022-06-22 20:25:36+00:00): I think you have overreacted, and have thrown out a number of useful edits together with the problematic ones, for example the addition of fees to toll gantries (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/node/1846273046) which you also wrongly changed back to toll booths. destination:ref tags that had been added in the changeset (which were correct and are useful for turn-by-turn navigation) were removed by you. A lot of valuable information has been lost because of your knee-jerk reaction to a few sharp kinks. Your revert may have repaired a few things but it would have been easier and friendlier had you given the mapper a chance to rectify these issues instead of asserting local dominance and in-your-face reverting the lot. It is too late now to revert your revert without unwanted side effects, else I would have done it, but please never do this again.
Trevor_1 (2022-06-22 21:11:53+00:00): Ok I won't, sorry. I can start adding back some of that information.
Trevor_1 (2022-06-23 20:52:34+00:00): I've now added back most of the correct information that was reverted. If there's anything I missed, let me know.
Andre68 (2022-06-07 16:50:55+00:00): Please do not add coastline tag to relations as it is only allowed for ways.
See WIKI: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcoastline
user_13865352 (2022-06-08 00:52:25+00:00): I can see that. Thank you.
Op'tRad (2025-09-01 19:27:14+00:00): Hallo,
Volgens Taya horen historische dingen die niet meer zichtbaar zijn in het veld eigenlijk thuis op OpenHistoricalMap. Naar het schijnt hebben vooral spoorwegfanaten de neiging dit te mappen. Ik zie nu dat je al aan de 4e versie bezig bent, vandaar. Zolang het in het veld is en niet in een vol gemapte stad wordt het gedoogd ... Maar, misschien wist je dit intussen al, het is al van drie jaar geleden. Groet, Werner
nyampire (2022-06-07 04:44:19+00:00): OSMへようこそ！
編集を確認しました。よく描けていると思います。これからも編集を続けてみていただけると嬉しいです。
Happy Mapping!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122048301
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-07-16 22:35:11+00:00): Agregue un nombre a la ubicación.
nyampire (2022-06-07 04:47:37+00:00): OSMへようこそ！
編集をレビューしました。
とてもよく描けていると思います。これからもぜひ、マッピングを続けてみてください！
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122048523
Kovoschiz (2022-06-07 10:44:11+00:00): It's technically not wrong for the `building:part=` above.
Allison P (2022-06-07 19:38:01+00:00): I'd think https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/664548779 should be landuse=education over landuse=school because there are two schools there, and landuse=school implies the existence of a single school. It is an approved tag, just one that doesn't render.
h551w (2022-06-07 23:18:39+00:00): Oh, yep you're right, that's a subtle distinction. I've reverted that
radiotrefoil (2023-11-28 09:16:36+00:00): Thanks for your GPS note. I have spotted the trig station on the satellite imagery and adjusted the position of the node.
user_5359 (2022-06-08 17:47:10+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please have a look on http://www.osm.org/way/412587889. What is the meaning of the tag strata_plan = NW1460?
ultramoka (2022-06-08 18:13:25+00:00): Sorry, I was testing. I didn't realize I'd committed that.
user_5359 (2022-06-08 18:47:55+00:00): Could we remove this (or get a better key)?
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:29+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-06-07 23:36:36+00:00): boa noite, no que tange ao mapeamento desta escola: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1067456777 acredito que da maneira anterior talvez estivesse mais correta, separando a construção em blocos, voce juntou tudo em um só bloco.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:29:04+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:52+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:29:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
literan (2022-06-07 17:47:24+00:00): для аттракционов не нужны теги tourism=attraction, это не достопримечательности. В вики все написано.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:56+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:29:09+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:29:07+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:29:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:44+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:25+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
Carnildo (2022-06-07 21:16:37+00:00): Are you sure the name is correct?  The Spokane County streets department doesn't have a record of a street by that name there, while the assessor's office says the property has a "Park Lane" address.
chrispix (2022-06-07 22:15:15+00:00): Name is correct, issue is that most of these streets are private (south of Ely / 18th) and while the property does have a park lane address, there is also a shop on property w/ it's own electric that is listed as Tegridy.
Carnildo (2022-06-08 02:51:37+00:00): Thanks for the confirmation.
Glassman (2022-06-08 21:03:35+00:00): #TIP: OSM doesn't use abbreviations in street names. The reason is that software has a hard time unabbreviating.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122051851
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:29:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:46+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:42+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:27+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:35+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:30+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:29:14+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 14:28:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122251158 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits by a user trying to avoid https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
user_8655426 (2022-06-07 10:53:43+00:00): Hello,
What is the meaning of the question mark you entered in the name field?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1067471712
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1067468740
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1067468743
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1067468737

Please read the definition of "Key: name".
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122053125
user_8655426 (2022-06-10 11:10:24+00:00): Thank you for removing the question mark. (#122141766, #122141746)
However, the construction site and planned area you added are not shown in the aerial image. (You used Maxar Premium Imagery and GSImaps/std.)
OSM is a project that maps existing objects on the ground.
Did you go to the site and confirm that they are under construction?
Was there a sign that says "坂東PA（下り線）" at the site?
Please tell us the sources you used for this changeset. 

Key:proposed
"You are also encouraged to add the source for the plan with source=*. Please take care about copyright issues and don't copy from plans you're not entitled to do so. "
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:proposed
user_8655426 (2022-06-17 09:46:22+00:00): Unfortunately, you're ignoring messages from other users and continuing to edit.
http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=15661662
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Yueying-8520/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1062244879/history

Please imagine your future after reading the following pages.

Data working group
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Data_working_group

Ban Policy
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Ban_Policy

Legal FAQ
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ

We will wait for your reply for a few more days.
We are watching you!
user_8655426 (2022-06-27 12:00:00+00:00): 感谢您删除问号。 (#122141766, #122141746)
但是，您添加的施工现场和规划区域未显示在航拍图中。 （您使用了 Maxar Premium Imagery 和 GSImaps/std。）
OSM 是一个映射地面上现有对象的项目。
您是否去过现场并确认它们正在建设中？
现场有没有写着“坂東PA（下り線）”的牌子？
请告诉我们您用于此变更集的来源。

Zh-hans:Key:proposed
"建议您同时使用source=*添加该规划的来源。请注意版权问题，不要从您无权复制的规划中复制内容。没有明确参考资料证明的规划要素应从地图中删除。" 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hans:Key:proposed