piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
hauke-stieler (2022-01-31 11:51:49+00:00): Hi,

du hast hier einen POI hinzugefügt (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9278003786), obwohl das Gebäude selbst schon Daten wie z.B. Name und E-Mail Adresse trägt. Das ist jetzt etwas doppelt und durcheinander. Wäre super, wenn du das einheitlich machen könntest (am besten alles am Gebäude, da es das ja schon länger gibt). Auch ist der tag tourism=attraction hier fehl am Platz, da eine Diakonie ja alles andere als eine touristische Attraktion ist. Den also bitte gleich mit entfernen.

Viele Grüße
Hauke
vulasala (2021-11-24 07:29:08+00:00): Hi ron_harvie,
Trust you are doing well. I have deleted the way 1005601464 which is a duplicated way.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114144510
marczoutendijk (2021-12-04 10:56:56+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114550822 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert of vandalism of user adding new highways on top of existing ones.
vulasala (2021-11-24 07:28:03+00:00): Hi ron_harvie,
Trust you are doing well. I have deleted the way 1005601584 which is a duplicated way.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114144527
marczoutendijk (2021-12-04 10:56:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114550822 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert of vandalism of user adding new highways on top of existing ones.
Warin61 (2023-08-16 08:25:39+00:00): Hi
This gate you have placed on Leakes Road near the railway crossing ... so this road cannot be used across the rail way crossing???  Yet the imagery looks to have vehicles using it... old imagery? If the crossing no longer exists then that section of road should be removed...
opendcc (2021-11-25 16:10:03+00:00): Hallo,

ich hatte das Hofcafe auf geschlossen gestellt. Es gibt es ja noch - halt zu. Bitte so belassen und nicht löschen.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:58:54+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
Martin Constantino–Bodin (2022-09-15 09:43:33+00:00): Bonjour,
Je ne comprends pas à quoi servent les lignes https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1005604948 et https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1005604949 Ces informations me semblent dériver directement des informations de la rue René Thom. Y a-t-il une raison particulière pour avoir ajouté ces lignes ?
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:52:52+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
Enock4seth (2021-11-26 09:24:18+00:00): Hi, the changeset comment is not meant for #hastags ONLY,  please do well to use a descriptive text about what you did, read https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments 

I believe all those ways mapped as "highway=unclassified" are too good to be true, those might either be some path/residential/track. Please avoid adding tags where you are not really sure of what you are doing.
felipeeugenio (2021-11-23 19:29:02+00:00): Hola. Por favor si la reja o muralla va pegada al deslinde de la propiedad, entonces dejelas juntas. que si no se arma un enjambre de vias que son todas lo mismo.
Por otra parte, en algunas casas la voluntad de seguir el la figura real de la casa fue mínimo. ojo con eso por favor
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:54:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:56:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-03-01 18:37:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 117961003, 117970393, 117965218, 117980733 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint about invalid edits, and a lack of decent reply (see https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=414659 , https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Max_Kritic/blocks ) reverting changesets where _only_ osmose was used.
HubMiner (2022-05-14 15:09:41+00:00): Hi, please take a look at this note proposing removal of the proposed IL53 extension.  I don't want to delete your hard work without checking with you first.  Thanks!

https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2559319#

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/370778813#map=15/42.1628/-88.0186
HubMiner (2022-05-14 15:11:12+00:00): I forgot to look at history, you can ignore this.
Note_Fixer (2022-11-05 11:30:54+00:00): https://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/ct-lbr-blaser-column-route-53-dead-tl-0808-20190801-u3alf5vc6vccxo53ovx4vpejii-story.html
CurlingMan13 (2022-11-05 14:12:28+00:00): @HubMiner

Looks like this will never be built.  Want to go ahead and delete it?  Thanks!
HubMiner (2022-11-06 19:56:33+00:00): @CurlingMan13
Thanks for updating it!
JeroenHoek (2021-11-23 18:28:15+00:00): Why are you deleting all those parking spaces?
JeroenHoek (2021-11-23 18:32:51+00:00): You've also changed the outlines of some houses. In the Netherlands those are imported from a very accurate source. You should not change these unless you know what you are doing.
JeroenHoek (2021-11-23 18:34:28+00:00): These parking spaces were deleted by you:

https://postimg.cc/bSd3WKWF

Will you revert your changeset?
JeroenHoek (2021-11-24 17:39:02+00:00): Your changeset history page shows that you have moved on to other areas and are ignoring my comments.

I have reverted this changeset in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/114191379 to undo the damage.

Please have a look at my comments, and stop applying fixes for the warnings ID shows without considering that actual data. I would still like to know why you deleted those parking spaces; there's nothing wrong with them, and if I hadn't been looking at recent changesets in the area they would have just been lost.
JeroenHoek (2021-11-24 17:40:32+00:00): And again: fixing the tagging for natural=wetland is a good thing, but if you focus on that problem, then don't try to fix all sorts of unrelated warnings as well.
user_8101879 (2021-11-27 16:56:43+00:00): Hi,

I did that because I saw that, at the same place, there was a parking for all the area and individual parking spaces : I think you should choose one or the other process but not both. The second is usefull if you have a particular information for one particular space (like a space for  delivery or a space for disabled person) otherwise it is clearly, for me, useless. But no problem if you put it back, I respect your choice.

Best regards
user_8101879 (2021-11-27 17:02:31+00:00): And for houses, I change when there are 2 points very close (I merge them). Or when points are clearly, with a big zoom, aligned.
Sorry if I have deleted nodes by mistake, it was not my intention
user_8101879 (2021-11-27 17:04:54+00:00): When I say "point" I mean "node"
JeroenHoek (2021-11-27 17:25:16+00:00): What?? It is completely fine to map individual parking_spaces within amenity=parking. In fact, that is how you are supposed to map them. Removing these is vandalism!

From the wiki:

“Use amenity=parking_space to map a single parking space on a parking lot. Mapping parking spaces is an addition, not a replacement, to mapping a whole parking lot with amenity=parking.”

Read up on the documentation of tags before you break people's work! Just how many parking lots worldwide have you ruined with your edits by now?
user_8101879 (2021-11-27 18:07:55+00:00): from wiki : 
Exceptions for using one area to represent more than one space :
A lot of similar parking spaces side by side without any differing attributes and you don't want to put that much effort into it."

For me clearly useless but you may do it of course, I respect your point of view. Sorry if I removed part of your work, I did't want that, like I said, I just wanted to remove useless     object.
But no problem, I won't do it again.

I work all over the world and I add a lot of missing parkings if you want to know. Between nothing, add a parking area and add 50 parking spaces, I have to choose the more useful for people using these informations.

Sorry again.

Best regards
JeroenHoek (2021-11-27 18:18:06+00:00): Read this part of the sentence you quoted very carefully: “AND you don't want to put that much effort into it”.

That means that if you don't want to, you don't have to draw the parking spaces. It means YOU don't have to map them. It does NOT mean that you should delete parking spaces mapped by others if they exist and are mapped accurately. That is plain and simple vandalism, and goes against all documentation on this topic and OpenStreeMap's conventions on proper edits.

You've completely misunderstood the meaning of the documentation.
AntMadeira (2021-11-29 19:07:21+00:00): Olá, Trans Serrano.
As boas-vindas ao OpenStreetMap.

Este conjunto de alterações foi revertido por não fazer sentido nenhum e de duplicar o correto, que já existe e que é o place=town correspondente a Góis.
Antes de fazeres edições que exigem algum conhecimento da edição do mapa, aconselho-te a consultar o canal oficial da comunidade OSM Portugal, no Telegram, em https://t.me/OSMPortugal onde poderás esclarecer dúvidas e ter acesso a documentação útil.

Ao dispor,
António Madeira.
Carnildo (2021-11-23 23:38:07+00:00): Could you please be more careful in your checking?  You had two buildings overlapping driveways, and about three dozen cases of a building outline covering more than one building.
rayleigh1 (2021-11-26 10:17:00+00:00): Could you point me to the cases of buildings covering more than 1 building? I can imagine missing a driveway, but I didn't notice any doubled buildings, thanks in advance.
rayleigh1 (2021-11-26 10:17:30+00:00): And it's weird that the validator didn't complain about overlapping buildings and highways, do you know why that may be the case?
Carnildo (2021-11-26 19:05:18+00:00): I already fixed the multiple-coverage outlines ones I saw.  The clearest example would probably be https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1005616535#map=19/46.41575/-117.04922 where the outline originally covered the two buildings to the north.  If you use Esri Clarity imagery or view things from the side using Bing Streetside imagery, it's clear that it's two houses and a detached garage.

If you want to see the changes I made, it's https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/114160231 (OSMCha lets you view the changes in the context of imagery at https://osmcha.org/changesets/114160231/).
rayleigh1 (2021-11-28 11:21:09+00:00): Thank you, I'll make sure to check for such errors more thoroughly next time.
pitfire (2023-01-20 06:45:58+00:00): Hi rempshaener,

in der Golfplatzbebauung ist aber noch so einiges nachzubessern. In den Gebäuden stehen noch die Bäume. Die Wege kreuzen die Gebäude. Das ist entweder Indoor oder building_passage.

Gruß pitfire
rempshaener (2023-01-20 19:36:45+00:00): Hallo,
ich hatte tatsächlich nur die Gebäude angepasst, die Bäume habe ich übersehen.
Da, wo wie Wege jetzt noch kreuzen, laufen sie auf dem Gebäude.
Schau doch bitte einfach mal.
Viele Grüße
hsc666 (2021-11-23 17:45:28+00:00): Hallo Laufstrecke und willkommen!

Prima, dass Du bei OSM mitmachen möchtest. Bedenke aber bitte, dass OSM kein Spielzeug ist und Menschen sich auf die Richtigkeit der Daten verlassen. Deine Änderungen musste ich daher wieder zurücksetzen. Bitte informiere Dich vor Deiner nächsten Änderung im Wiki, wie Dinge eingetragen werden!

VG
hsc666
Dimitar155 (2021-11-26 12:12:27+00:00): Hi djadala,

I can see that you have put a lot of effort into getting the corners of the buildings to be exactly 90 degrees, but there is an easier way. You just have to press Q and the angles will be automatically straightened.

Regards,
Dimitar
marczoutendijk (2021-12-01 10:49:07+00:00): Hi Djam Aliyev,
Until now you have used as changeset comment: "I remake a map".
It is much appreciated if you give more details in your comments, as you can read here:  
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
Also you didn't answer the question on one of your previous changesets:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/113255706.
Please do so now!

Marc Zoutendijk  
OpenStreetMap Foundation  
Data Working Group
EP_Repair (2021-12-20 17:08:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 115174640 where the changeset comment is: reverting damages to highway classifications by Djam (ref Ticket#2021120110000024). Djam was contacted and asked to provide some reasoning for making changes to highways but no response was received by the DWG.
elot360 (2021-11-29 09:45:31+00:00): Jakieś źródło że ten i sąsiedni węzeł zmieniły swoje nazwy? Bo ja sobie żadnych zmian w rozporządzeniach nie przypominam
Yunkers (2021-12-03 23:37:16+00:00): Brak reakcji autora i źródła, zmieniam nazwy na poprzednie.
monotar (2021-11-26 01:34:38+00:00): Hallo Liebe AG Rad,

Hier werden Varianten eingezeichnet, meine Frage: sind diese wirklich vorhanden? In der Regel gibt es bei der D4 nur eine Route und keine Varianten, das ist unüblich. Was nicht vorhanden ist, wird auch nicht eingezeichnet, auch keine selbst ausgedachten oder empfohlenen Routen!
tordans (2021-11-24 06:33:31+00:00): Danke, masix. Falls du es noch nicht kennst: in der Region lädt gerade https://www.zesplus.de/forschungsprojekt und bei dem Projekt werden auch OSM Daten verwendet. Alle Daten mit Fahrradbezug helfen daher sehr. VG
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114149504
SHARCRASH (2021-11-23 17:37:05+00:00): + sidewalk added
Lokai (2021-12-21 03:28:01+00:00): Hallo, im Grunde ist das Befahren einiger Waldwege in östlicher Verlängerung der Steigstraße verboten. Dort wurde Zeichen 250 aufgestellt. Nur in der Nähe des Rettungspunktes 6511-233 ist einmal das Zeichen mit DE:1026-38 angebracht, sonst fehlen Zusatzzeichen. Es könnte sein, dass die Zusatzzeichen vergessen wurden aber auch absichtlich nicht angebracht wurden. Am "Steinbruch" verläuft eine MTB-Route und angeblich Radweg Tour 9, somit sind die Schilder nicht ganz korrekt angebracht.

access=forestry ist falsch, weil es auch Fußgänger das Betreten verbietet, es gibt den tag vehicle=<...>. Somit erspart sich der tag access=yes
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:02:30+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 22:01:39+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.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-02-14 21:01:05+00:00): You tagged a creek as a path
SomeoneElse (2021-11-29 12:32:01+00:00): Just for info, I've mentioned this changeset in a diary comment: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/martin-kokos/diary/398149
martin-kokos (2021-11-29 14:05:01+00:00): Hi Josuer. It appears you have removed a way and left only point behind as seen in screenshot in link in previous comment. Since then the road has been re-added via maproulette challenge https://osmcha.org/changesets/114335706/ . Points have been still left behind.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114150538
Josuer (2021-11-29 18:51:18+00:00): Hi Martin and SomeoneElse, 
I´m not sure how it happend, I´m fixing it. Thank you both!
InsertUser (2021-11-24 19:12:56+00:00): I'm pretty sure these are waterway=tidal_channel through wetland rather than rivers or streams.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114150646
Lee Carré (2022-03-12 00:26:07+00:00): Seems that a blundered by joining the footpath to the landuse=residential boundary, rather than the highway. D'oh 🤦‍♂️.

Probably a little too cold & tired, at the time.

Corrected in http://www.osm.org/changeset/118383850
quadrangle (2021-11-23 18:28:57+00:00): Changeset corrects street name EAST of Coachman Road rather than west.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-14 14:24:48+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9278506338/history has shop = machinery that was added in this edit
shop=machinery ? What kind of machines? Industrial machines? Washing machines? Computers? (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop for possible values - though maybe new one is needed). Or is it not actually a place where you can walk in and buy stuff? But rather internal company office tagged as office=company?
Merzof (2025-05-24 21:01:58+00:00): Hi Mateusz, I've just checked online and it used to be a second-hand industrial machinery shop, but it looks like this business has now closed since the 2021 edit; the business seems to still exist but doesn't seem to have a presence here anymore. I can do a survey next week when I'm next in Stockport and confirm this.
eggie (2021-11-23 19:08:05+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Je vraagt feedback...
Je hebt de straatnaam aangepast naar IJdoornlaan.  Wat is je bron in deze?  int_name	IJdoornlaan komt me onbekend voor. 'k Denk dat die regel wel weg kan.
Verder zijn tweewielers vaak uitgezonderd van oneway=yes..  Is dat hier het geval?
Zo ja.. dan toevoegen oneway:bicycle=no  evt. ook voor moped en mofa.

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2021-11-23 19:30:21+00:00): Pas ook even sidewalk =right aan naar sidewalk=left
en
oneway:bicycle=no

foot=yes mag weg. (default)
ook voor mofa en moped
gr eggie
felipeeugenio (2021-11-23 21:39:57+00:00): Estimado. el numero de la casa va como numero ya sea en housenumber o en addr:unit, en caso de que el condominio tenga una dirección.
No se usa la palabra parcela y menos el tag name=
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114151681
hauke-stieler (2022-01-31 15:03:16+00:00): Hi,

du hast hier das Diakonie-Büro als touristische Attraktion getaggt, das ist so definitiv nicht richtig. Bitte tagge das entsprechend um, danke.

Viele Grüße
Hauke
kawino85 (2021-11-23 18:50:54+00:00): Hi gsperb,

is there any way to tag https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1005650069 as a former farm?
gsperb (2021-11-24 09:59:34+00:00): Eine Mühle ist kein Bauernhof sondern eine Mühle. 
Ein ehemaliger Bauernhof ist uninteressant. Er besteht, so wie eine ehemalige Mühle, aus einem/mehreren Gebäuden.
Ein Bauernhof in einem Ortsgebiet  ist kein spezieller Bauenhof, sonst bestünden viele Orte nur aus einzelnen Bauernhöfen.
hauke-stieler (2022-01-31 15:03:19+00:00): Hi,

du hast hier das Diakonie-Büro als touristische Attraktion getaggt, das ist so definitiv nicht richtig. Bitte tagge das entsprechend um, danke.

Viele Grüße
Hauke
jhmeniscus (2021-11-24 21:10:50+00:00): Hello, I saw this update to CPR extension and while it does perhaps capture better the exact current physical nature of the project and AKS's description of current gravel road as just an access road. I feel like the previous mapping of just having a single way and just calling it CPR under construction was simpler as it's the same right of way and would make future updates once segments are paved easier as the mapper would just need to edit the tagging from construction status. 

Just my thoughts on this. Thanks for your work in South Hillsboro and the region. Between you ArchPDX and I, there is a lot of interest in mapping the rapidly evolving changes in the area which I think benefits the map quality overall very much.
VictorIE (2022-03-30 10:01:59+00:00): Hi, 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/325230886

The L2464 and L2473 are local roads and should be marked as highway=tertiary or highway=unclassified. 

highway=secondary is reserved for regional roads. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ireland/Roads
user_5359 (2021-11-26 15:48:55+00:00): Hello! Please have look on http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/195232055! What is the meaning key add`?
syntex (2021-11-26 17:00:50+00:00): Typo, addr:housename. Fixed
eggie (2021-11-23 19:32:52+00:00): Top... Nu nog sidewalk left... en toevoegen de uitzondering voor moped en mofa.
mapse
eggie
caxton (2021-11-24 08:29:44+00:00): Why have you not merged the windmill node with the building outline? We are not in the address-node-loving Netherlands ;)
marczoutendijk (2021-11-24 09:43:12+00:00): Because I first only had added the mill as a node. I now have merged them.
Why don't you start editing yourself? You have a useracoount now! With iD it is easy to do. And you should read some: https://www.openstreetmap.org/help
edircksen (2021-12-05 14:28:13+00:00): Not an import
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114154652
nadol (2021-11-25 08:23:11+00:00): Ten fotoradar od dawna jest nieczynny.
Mariusz33 (2021-11-25 09:55:25+00:00): dlaczego tak sądzisz?
niedaleko na głównej (3 pasmowej) faktycznie jest zasłonięty, ale ten (pomiędzy ekranami a Decathlonem) jak najbardziej stoi i jest czynny. jest również poprzedzony niebieskim znakiem informacyjnym. dodatkowo większość kierujących nie zwracając uwagi na poprzednie znaki ograniczenia 80, hamuje do 50, co stwarza zagrożenie, więc jak siedzą z nosem w fonach, to może na jakiejś apce im wyskoczy, że jednak 80
nadol (2021-11-25 11:07:48+00:00): Spójrz tu: https://www.canard.gitd.gov.pl/cms/o-nas/mapa-urzadzen
https://ibb.co/8g5x5Zq
Nie ma go na liście bo jest nieaktywny. Niedaleko w Markach stoi aktywny i jego widać na mapie. Widać również świeżo uruchomiony pomiar odcinkowy.
Jeżdżę tędy praktycznie codziennie, wiem, że ten fotoradar to "pustak".
Mariusz33 (2021-11-25 18:52:04+00:00): Tak nie za bardzo rozumiem, do czego ta dyskusja ma doprowadzić. Radar stoi. Więc jest na mapie. Jak latarnia nie świeci, to jej nie zaznaczasz? Nie chcesz nie hamuj. Pojedź 120, pochwal się za pół roku. Za mandaty innych też bierzesz odpowiedzialność? Daj namiary na siebie wrzucimy je na kanały w telegramie, fejsie, czy gdzie tam.
Kompletnie nie rozumiem argumentu, że jeździsz tamtędy codziennie. Ja też. No i co z tego? To nie zmienia rzeczywistości, ani nic nie wnosi.
Z tego co wiem, to nie może być fejkowych radarów, zgodnie z prawem, więc jeżeli chcesz coś wnieść, to doprowadź do demontażu albo chociaż zasłonięcia tego urządzenia.
Pod mapką masz informację "Jeżeli lokalizacja której szukasz nie znajduje się na mapie skontaktuj się proszę z CANARD.
Powyższa mapa ma charakter wyłącznie poglądowy i nie jest dokumentem urzędowym. Informacje na niej zawarte nie mogą być podstawą do jakichkolwiek roszczeń."
Zakończmy na tym.
nadol (2021-11-26 08:48:03+00:00): Nie kwestionuję jego istnienia w tym miejscu a tylko to, że nie jest aktywny. Co do ograniczeń prędkości o których piszesz są do tego inne narzędzia (np. prawidłowo ustawione prędkości dla dróg).
AllotmentCyclist (2021-12-05 18:13:44+00:00): This has now been completed.
Lee Carré (2021-11-26 14:15:20+00:00): Smaller changeset areas, please: http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets