piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Adamant1 (2018-06-30 02:18:22+00:00): No worries. I seem to be getting an ever growing group of stalkers lately. I prefer that though over no accountability. I was actually never clear on the copyright issue anyway. So I'm glad its being brought up. 
In this particular case there was nothing explicitly stating the information was copyrighted on the website. So I took liberties to use it due to the bad state of how it was mapped before I put the information in there. I figured the shopping center would probably prefer correct information over stuff that was just outright wrong. 
From what it says on the wiki about copyright, it sounds like it mostly extends to usage of proprietary commercial maps. Which I wouldn't use as sources. To me though, things like phone numbers and addresses are essentially public domain.  So I don't see an issue with obtaining them from a website that isn't a commercial business directory in the way something like Google maps is. Otherwise, 90% of the business information on here should probably be removed. Since things like hours and phone numbers probably mostly don't come on the ground surveying.   
A lot of times when dealing with notes people will make comments like "a basic Google search shows that" or "the company's website that" in order to correct things. I am sure none of them got implicit allowance from Google or the businesses, but it would be unrealistic to expect them to. Especially in cases where the information is already there but just being doubled checked. 
I also think that since Google in particular already makes its money off the people viewing the information on their website or clicking through an add, what the person does with the information they gain from their website is really none of their business. Since the information is in their heads at that point. Which makes them the holder of it and therefore able to use it how they wish. Otherwise, people would have to be giving Google and other similar sites royalties on things like furniture that they created based on a Google search they did for how to make it. I don't see OSM should be any different. Which is neither here or there I guess, but is something I have been thinking about. 
Id say in this particular case the shopping center gains more business from the information on here being correct. So I don't why it should be an issue. If there is something that needs to be removed though, I'm happy to do it because it still be more accurate than how it was originally. Plus, as they say "It is better to have mapped and been reverted, than to have never mapped at all."
freebeer (2018-07-05 17:43:36+00:00): Mornin', Ferda Mravanec, Stalker 13 checking in here and sounding off.
Methinks in the time you spent replying, you could have fired off a quick mail or call to the management and gotten a permission that would have been fine.
.
There is much that is debate-worthy, and while I would expect that a mall whose main business is not mapping would be fine with promoting their tenants, today I read of a case elsewhere a different interest business has made a copyright complaint.  Better safe than sorry.
.
Copyright exists by default on everything published, unless specified otherwise.  Further, while it may not be the case for you that individual facts can be copyrighted, in other jurisdictions, a collection of them can be, or comprises a protected database.
.
What you feel is no substitute for official permission, where here I feel a casual `no problem' via phone call is fine, but for a larger scale action, like the attempt to bulk import worldofstadiums.com and similar sites with a business interest depending on visitor clicks, I expect a more substantial waiver is necessary.
.
Ultimately, each mapper is responsible for their sources.  Just because you feel a large amount of data is likely not 100% sound does not give you licence to do the same, but at least you are documenting your sources in case of later questions, your justifications being irrelevant to a copyright complaint, should one materialise.  Which we hope will not happen, but not everyone views things the same way.
.
But is it better to have mapped and been redacted?
Adamant1 (2018-07-06 06:14:23+00:00): Morning, although I agree with you about the wasted time replying versus sending them an email to ask, that could be said for a lot of the note conversation on here and I felt that it was something I needed better clarification on from people more knowledgeable then me about this stuff like you and Mateusz Konieczny. Which I have received. So its not time wasted in my belief. Whatever that adds to it. 
While I mostly agree with what both of you had said and I agree that official confirmation is normally the way to go. I still think it unrealistic to do that in a lot of instances and following the standard to a tee would make most of the stuff on this map not exist on this map in the first place. Especially in cases of getting business information like phone numbers and hours that can't be gotten through completely legitimate means on any kind of major scale. Which I think is a good case for why this map shouldn't contain that kind of information in the first place then anything. For some reason I was the one that called out for it though and only in this particular instance because I took the time to site the source. Since I wasn't clear if it was OK to use or not. So I felt there was a need to document it just in case. It seems as though most things I am doing lately, sound and good intentioned or not is getting over scrutinized for whatever reason. When most things I get called out on could apply to everyone else and I don't see them getting the treatment. There's a bunch of edits and notes going back years mentioning Googles maps or Google search as a reference, that never get a passing glance from anyone. So I thought maybe I could squeeze one by myself in this single case. Obviously I was wrong though. Ignorance, complicated, badly laid out rules and what other mappers do is no excuse. Things happen. Though, I'm willing to gut the shopping center and delete the whole place if it makes a difference. Its not like that information couldn't easily be found someone else and just put back anyway. 

I doubt anyone would of came by filed a complaint on it either if I hadn't of cited the source and there wasn't this discussion about it in the first place. That's neither here or there though. And I hope the same flake is given to everyone else.
Adamant1 (2018-07-06 06:34:09+00:00): I just gutted the place. I know it doesn't remove it from the database completely, but at least I did my part to fix my error. Thanks to both of you for bringing it to my attention. Hopefully there is no further issue. A few places I didn't add might of gotten deleted in the process, but that's life I guess. Hopefully someone else can add them back. 

Freebeer, in most cases its not better to have mapped and been redacted and it wasn't meant as an excuse. I think in this case it is though because allowed me though learn from my mistake and improve my mapping going forward. I didn't mean it to sound like I think copyright law should be disregarded though. It was just after the fact, Mateusz Konieczny had already been chiding me for things other places, and I just wasn't sure what else to say. I appreciate you calling me out on it though. I definitely could of phrased things better or just not replied until some time had passed and I had put more thought into it. I think your and Mateusz Konieczny critiques are generally correct though. So they are duly noted for future edits.
nplath (2018-10-18 22:17:31+00:00): These buildings look so perfect, are they imported?
SomeoneElse_Revert (2018-07-29 09:57:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 61158822 where the changeset comment is: Reverting a series of imaginary features in Indonesia (railways, toll roads)
SomeoneElse_Revert (2018-07-29 09:57:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 61158822 where the changeset comment is: Reverting a series of imaginary features in Indonesia (railways, toll roads)
user_5359 (2018-06-28 15:32:30+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please don't mark the whole property as building. Only mark the building as building. 
If two POI (point of interest) exists one building, please don't add two different keys on the building. Add two points with different keys inside the building instead.
Glassman (2018-06-29 02:36:24+00:00): There are numerous validation errors with your edit. I'm considering reverting it. Can you run a validation check and clean up all the errors? If I don't hear back from you, I will revert your edits.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60233433
adrianojbr (2018-07-08 14:09:49+00:00): por que vc mapeou diversas casas como castelos?
Supaplex (2019-02-07 15:11:27+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
給Pokemon Go玩家的建議：https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tips_for_new_(Pokemon_Go)_mappers

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
Telegram OpenStreetMap Taiwan https://t.me/joinchat/Aqu2IgnTuIidMfREdNmomQ
Telegram OpenStreetMap Asia https://t.me/OpenStreetMapAsia
Slack https://osm-tw.signup.team/

Happy Mapping!
mavl (2018-12-25 00:07:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:47:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:14:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-24 23:35:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:07:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:35:12+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:05:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:13:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:04:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
Nakaner-repair (2018-07-01 13:56:20+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 60322446 where the changeset comment is: Revert changeset 60233935 because supermarktes like Edeka are not located in churces. This edit was done using the buggy Wheelmap. It is more likely that it is an accident than intentional.
Nakaner (2018-07-01 13:57:14+00:00): Das ist jetzt der zweite Beitrag von dir und der zweite der gelöscht wurde. Bitte lass die Finger von der Wheelmap, sie taugt nichts und schadet OpenStreetMap nur.
user_5359 (2018-06-28 15:25:02+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Short question about your change set: What should your "fixme" key tell us and why is the park registered twice in the relation? A relation is by the way not necessary at all in this case.
mavl (2018-12-25 00:28:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-24 23:44:09+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:36:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
TuanIfan (2019-03-07 00:37:29+00:00): Hi anh. Is this a public park or a company leisure area?
QuangDBui@TMA (2019-03-07 01:34:34+00:00): Hi Tuan,
This is our new working area, TMA Innovation Park. It is under construction now and will be completed by end of this year.
This is to boot up IT industry for Binh Dinh.

Thanks, Quang
TuanIfan (2019-03-07 01:56:34+00:00): That’s wonderful anh! Congrats and wish you all more success in the upcoming times.

Due to new satellite imageries available on Bing maps, I have started re-mapping many cities in Vietnam, from Ha Long (city) to Nha Trang. Currently I am prioritising in : 
- adding roads and road names
- main facilities (schools, places of worship, markets and large buildings, parks)
- Boundaries of towns and wards.

Sample of Ha Long new library and 30 Oct Square can be seen here: https://osm.org/go/4fFYxf9P--

Let me know if I can help you with anything.

Also something I have added may have clashed with your updates (i.e. road properties or road levels). Pls let me know if you need fixing.
b-jazz (2018-09-28 23:31:37+00:00): There are a few problems here:
1) address information shouldn't be used as the "name" of a feature
2) addresses shouldn't be abbreviated "NE" -> "Northeast", "Ave" -> "Avenue"
3) you didn't get the address information from Bing aerial imagery. If you got it from a survey of the area, great. If you got it from a copyrighted source, you put OSM at risk of copyright infringement.

Please correct these mistakes.
user_5359 (2018-06-28 15:17:39+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please notice: the minimum keys for an address is addr:street and addr:housenumber! Can you add the value for the house number, please?
tux67 (2018-06-28 06:07:39+00:00): Hi norbosm,
wenn du weisst, welcher der Seen zum Angeln genutzt wird, könntest du ggf. noch ein leisure=fishing dazunehmen. 
Ich nehme an Angelsee beschreibt den Zweck - ist aber nicht der Name.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Names#name_ist_nur_der_Name
Passt vielleicht eher in description?

Gruß
Stephan (tux67)
BCNorwich (2018-06-28 07:37:37+00:00): Hi, I squared up the buildings, zoomed in and corrected the shapes. I think it looks better now, do you?
regards Bernard
Baloo Uriza (2018-06-29 01:47:12+00:00): Not sure these streets inside the apartment complex are actually named.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60235541
phidauex (2018-06-29 02:01:37+00:00): Checked against streetside imagery and you are right, don't seem to be any signs. TIGER is further off in Tulsa than I'm used to, will pay closer attention.
Baloo Uriza (2018-06-29 04:06:05+00:00): Yeah, it's nowhere near as far off as Portland, Oregon was, though.  My god when I was the only serious editor there, that was like, "Why did we ever import this?" bad.
Baloo Uriza (2018-06-29 01:40:01+00:00): I used to live in this RV park, again, not an intentionally bad edit, but this defintiely has no name.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60235572
phidauex (2018-06-29 01:53:00+00:00): Got it, sorry for the bad import
Baloo Uriza (2018-06-29 01:37:53+00:00): Not an intentionally bad edit, just part of Lincoln Avenue.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60235749
dvdhoven (2018-06-28 07:50:59+00:00): I have reverted this changeset.
You have connected the road Hooibaan over several rwn routes. Several rwn routes are destroyed by your action.
Never, never, never connect roads, when they are divided. And specilally noit with ID. ID is ther relation murderer.
dvdhoven (2018-06-28 07:54:44+00:00): I heb deze changeset terug gedraaid.
Meerdere rwn routes waren beschadigd door het doorverbinden van de Hooibaan.
Nooit wegen doorverbinden als ze doorgeknipt zijn, dat is meestal voor routerelaties. En met ID kun je relaties niet goed zien. ID is een relatiemoordenaar.
Het met de hand weer doorknippen van de Hooibaan en herstlellen van de routes was aanzienlijk meer werk geweest en bovendien beschouw ik het doorverbinden van wegen over routerelatie3s heen als vernieling. Mogelijk onbedoeld, maar toch
dvdhoven (2018-06-28 07:58:28+00:00): Het betrof de routes 28-73, 72-73, 72-75 en 75-76
ontour-ontour (2018-07-01 00:45:46+00:00): complete changeset revert by:
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=60312519

I assume your intention was to update restaurant name of node (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1843289396).

Done by: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/60312556
RicoElectrico (2018-06-28 21:16:57+00:00): Cześć, mam wskazówkę: Jeśli budynek ma w rzeczywistości kąty proste, to trzeba je wyprostować po narysowaniu. W edytorze iD opcja ta jest dostępna po zaznaczeniu budynku a następnie albo wciśnięciu klawisza S, albo wybraniu opcji z menu po wciśnięciu prawego przycisku myszy na zaznaczonym budynku.
RicoElectrico (2018-06-29 20:13:48+00:00): Poprawiłem budynki. Jeśli masz pytania, śmiało pisz ;-)
mrpulley (2018-08-27 10:38:22+00:00): I've been having a look at the street names for the former Ophir Road in Bathurst, and wanted to run these by you before I make any changes. From West to East:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/70512262 - Ophir Road remains correct (for now - this will probably change once the housing estate extends further west). There is a signpost marking the junction with this road with the western end of Howarth Close:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/30042221 Howarth Close - the western end where it joins O'Reilly Place has no other signposts. The Bathurst Regional Council Development Control Plan indicates that in the future, Howarth Close will be closed where the park/gully are. The house numbers on the LPI Basemap are consistent with this section being Howarth Close.

East of here is where it becomes tricky. The section from O'Reilly Place to Farmgate/Joubert https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/561914878 have no street signs. The house numbers on the southern side match up with the numbers for the rest of O'Reilly place, and the LPI Basemap marks this section as part of O'Reilly Place - but the house numbers on the northern side are large (227-233), so it could be considered part of Ophir Road. I've looked at https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/ which confirms this. I propose to use name=O'Reilly Place, alt_name=Ophir Road

The final section from Farmgate/Joubert to Westbourne https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/561914879 is clearly Ophir Road. There is a road sign at Westbourne Drive stating this, also the house numbers are large (213-223 and 212-218). Once the Westbourne end is closed off (as per the Development Control Plan), this is likely to be renamed.

Stop signs are still present at the junction with Westbourne Drive - I had added these before, so I'm planning to put them back in again.

Hopefully this all makes sense - please reply if you have any comments/queries.
Panning (2018-08-29 06:05:11+00:00): Hi mate,

sorry it's taken a while to get back to you. You've clearly put quite a bit of work and research in to this strange little part of town.
I've really only based my naming on a mix of street signs and  the road maps maintained by Bathurst Council. Seeing as these two sources don't agree, I've added a little common sense also, perhaps where it didn't exist.

I went out today to have another look at the signage and it goes as follows.
It calls the road Ophir Road from the intersection of Westbourne Drive through to the intersection of Riverside Retreat.
At the corner of Riverside Retreat, there's a street sign indicating it's called Howarth Close from there out to west as far as houses extend, at which point it becomes Ophir Road again.
Why on earth you'd interrupt one street name with another just to change it back is beyond me but that's how the signs show it.

The Council Street Map suggests it's Howarth Close all the way from the intersection of Westbourne Drive to the end of the current housing development. There's no mention on the map of it being Ophir Road at any point that the road is passing houses.

To reply to your specific points:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/70512262
I agree, this section and from there on west is Ophir Road.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/30042221
I'm not so sure on this section. As I said earlier, the Council Map suggests it's Howarth Close all the way from your marked point in the first link back to Westbourne Drive but there's a sign post on the corner of Riverside Retreat stating it's Ophir Road east of that corner. That would suggest the highlighted section in this link between Riverside Retreat and O'Reilly Place is actually called Ophir Road for houses on one side and O'Reilley Place for houses on the other as you've said.

The tricky section from O'Reilly Place to Farmgate Drive and Joubert Drive doesn't really have much of an option but to be tagged as you suggest and an alternate name. 

I agree with what you've put together and probably could have sourced some more information prior to my changes. Hopefully the whole place makes a little more sense when Council makes their changes in the years ahead. Cheers mate.
mrpulley (2018-08-29 10:02:43+00:00): OK, thanks. I'll make the changes to ways 561914879 and 561914878. For now, I'll leave way 30042221 alone. I missed the Ophir Road sign at Riverside Retreat (it was 6:15 AM! on my way to Dubbo last weekend).
Zbigniew_Cz (2018-07-06 19:04:20+00:00): No i kolego - kto poprawi te popsute adresy?
GOwin (2018-06-29 06:45:47+00:00): Hello. I'm curious about these changesets with the following hashtags: #dronebird, #aoyamavision.

Do you have any website where we can find information about your project, and your project leaders?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60237241