piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
okwithmydecay (2021-05-14 14:02:00+00:00): Looking through my photos there is a locked gate but it's not clear from the limited pictures I took where the path passes through the ruins. Perhaps it's best I just leave the path with the fixme as I am no longer in Norfolk to resurvey the path.
Endres Pelka (2015-10-01 13:56:02+00:00): Was ist dieser Punkt mit nur name=BHW?
https://www.osm.org/node/1181072371
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-11-28 14:26:57+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1182748006/history has shop = cobbler that was added in this edit
shop=cobbler? Is it intentionally used instead of shop=shoe_repair ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop=shoe_repair ) or shop=shoes (there is also craft=shoemaker...
nikusha (2025-11-28 17:59:52+00:00): Hi

I don't know. I was just voluntarily making import of data prepared by Jump Start Georgia (You can see this info in source field).
zool (2015-01-04 09:00:31+00:00): Where is this island?
malenki (2015-01-04 20:40:27+00:00): It seems it is at 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/-48.92626/15.12004
*scnr*
Seriously: is there any public available source referring to this island?
Nakaner (2015-01-13 18:53:44+00:00): Becuase there are only 4 nonsense-hits googleing this name, I suggest to revert this changeset.
Nakaner (2015-01-13 19:09:29+00:00): I have reverted this changeset.
Arxangel1365 (2017-09-08 08:28:25+00:00): 102604862 ул. Борис Паичадзе, Boris Paichadze str.
glebius (2017-09-08 15:07:18+00:00): Didn't understand what your comment mean. That was a huge import. If you know name of a particular street, just make a correction.
marc__marc (2021-04-03 07:57:54+00:00): Hello,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/102647068
did known the name of the clubhouse ? or a website ? or the activity ?
Regards,
Marc
Pikse (2023-02-17 14:13:10+00:00): It seems name "Vooremäe" stands for the cadastral unit of the quarry. If this forest area has a name then it's probably something different. Also nearby forest area name "Roiumetsa" is dubious.
dgmapping (2023-02-17 15:03:36+00:00): Pikse, even if the forest itself doesn't have an official name, the whole area is collectively know as Vooremäe or Vooremägi. So I wouldn't change it.
Pikse (2023-02-18 08:45:33+00:00): "Vooremägi" (not "Vooremäe") is indeed correct name for the landform (hill) in this location. I think it'd be better to map the hill as a node since it's dubious to consider it coextensive with this forest area (or, really, any landform with any forest area).
dgmapping (2023-02-18 11:21:28+00:00): There is a tiny hilltop called Vooremägi but the area around it, which happens to perfectly match relation 1458796, is commonly known as Vooremäe. These are distinct features.
Pikse (2023-02-18 12:08:03+00:00): Hilltop? This landform is about 1–2 km wide elevated area, also visible in the skyline if looked from Tartu. Põhikaart displays several "hilltops" next to each in this area. I doubt only a particular one of these is called Vooremägi. Can you verify this claim?

Place name register provides it as a name for an object of type "mägi, oos, voor, rannavall, luide":
https://xgis.maaamet.ee/knravalik/knr?obj_id=4966

The extent of this hill might be considered close to this forest relation, but it'd a bold claim to say that they exactly match. The extent of the landform probably isn't fixed, e.g. some may also consider the surronding fields as hillslopes, and also especially the proximate area to the east and south of the quarry (i.e. the removed part of the hill). Generally features without verifiable outline are supposed to be mapped as nodes, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:place#Areas

If there's some other wider named area with verifiable outline, other than the landform, then I think this also needs some source. There are of course features such as Vooremäe suusarajad or Vooremäe kruusakarjäär, but names of these objects, derived from hill name, are different than just "Vooremäe".
Pikse (2023-02-18 12:24:25+00:00): As for names of forests in general, in Estonian language these normally include generic term "mets", "palo", "laan" or alike.
dgmapping (2023-02-18 17:27:58+00:00): In my opinion there are 3 distinct features around this area:

1) Tiny hilltop, that can be mapped as a node in OSM. This is also the highest peak in "Kastre vald" at 125,6m:
https://et.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voorem%C3%A4gi#/media/Fail:Vooremagi.JPG

2) Elevated area, rough approximation:
https://xgis.maaamet.ee/xgis2/page/link/bmktUwWR

3) Forest area, as defined in relation 1458796

If you ask me how to name these distinct features, then peak should be named "Vooremägi" and the whole elevated area is commonly called "Vooremäe" or "Voorekas". I suspect the forest area doesn't need a name but since it overlaps nicely with elevated area it doesn't make sense to have 2 similar polygons for both "Vooremäe" and "Vooremäe mets".
Pikse (2023-02-19 13:22:53+00:00): Per EE Vooremägi is 2,2 km long and 0,5–1,1 km wide (narrower in south)[1], see http://entsyklopeedia.ee/artikkel/voorem%C3%A4gi1

This supports my previous understanding that Vooremägi stands for this approximate elevated area. Its highest point appears to be 125,6 m indeed, but I see no indication that only this particular more narrow point is named Vooremägi. Also "Vooremäe", appearing in some sentence context, is just the genitive form of "Vooremägi", and I don't see a clear distinction between the hill and some other approximate area named "Vooremäe".

The image of a small hill that you referred is actually for another Vooremägi in Elva vald.

Whether geographical feature should be mapped as a node or an area is not necessarily about size. In previous comment I referred to wiki page saying that also large areas without verifiable outline should be mapped as a node. The outline of a forest can be traced. The hill (elevated area) partly overlaps the forest, but unlike the forest its extent can be only approximated. Also the hill, unlike this relation, extents to the southern side of the quarry, as also evidenced by EE description, so at least in that side its extent is actually significantly different.

Phrase "Vooremäe mets" has been used, but it's rare. I don't know of a map or other source where it was used explicitly as a name. It may be just description, not a name, similar to, say, "Vooremäe nõlv" or "Vooremäe lagi". Even if it was a name then how we really verify that it also doesn't extent do the south where currently lies another forest relation? So based on current information provided I don't see a good reason to map any named areas in this location.
dgmapping (2023-02-19 20:10:06+00:00): When it comes to semantics, what does the name "Vooremäe" actually represent? Could it be, that this is not just an elevated area? Maybe it's a combination of landform, forest, infrastructure and all the recreational activities it is suitable for? If so, I don't see a tagging issue since this forest is part of Vooremäe and it can be used represent "Vooremäe" on a map.

Here are 2 minor usability issues I see when name tag from forest is removed:

1) When I search for "Vooremäe", I expect to see an area of Vooremäe, not a single node.

2) When browsing the map, carto currently displays "Vooremäe" from zoom level 12. In other maps it is also rendered adequately. Comparing this to for example Suur Munamägi, which is natural=peak, it is severely underrepresented by most renderers at the same zoom level. I know perfectly that "tagging for the renderer" is a bad practice but when it comes to usability, renderers shouldn't be ignored completely.

PS: Sorry for mixing up wikipedia links
Pikse (2023-02-20 08:47:22+00:00): Well, but at the end such of use "Vooremäe" is speculative rather than something that can be verified using sources and even less so on the ground, isn't it?

I don't quite see why expect to see area of Vooremäe (or Vooremägi) if it's merely an approximate hull drawing. You may draw it more or less in the same shape as this forest relation, but other users may draw in considerably different shape. Outline would suggest that the object is delimited in sources or on the ground, and that's just misleading.

Suur Munamägi and Vooremäe per current tagging are objects of different categories. In this form there isn't much of point to compare how they are rendered, is it?

I see one search related usability concern, namely user would have to know what exactly they search for, e.g. is it village named "Rebasemäe" or some hill named "Rebasemägi". In that regard possibly the search system could be improved, e.g. maybe it could return similar (less relevant) results too in such case. I don't think that manipulating the data itself one way or another is a good solution to this concern, though.
Pikse (2023-02-20 08:59:44+00:00): > forest is part of Vooremäe and it can be used represent "Vooremäe" on a map

That's quite messy. Don't the southern forest relation, possibly also the quarry or some other "part" also represent the hill (or similar speculative area) in this case? Should these all be named as "Vooremäe" then? Let alone data about different objects would be mixed this way, it'd also contradict the "one feature, one OSM element" principle.
dgmapping (2023-02-20 09:24:52+00:00): I am no expert on OSM tagging and I have only visited Voormäe couple of times, so I can't comment on what would be the best way to map it in OSM. All I can say is:

1) "Vooremäe" is a name of a popular area and this name is commonly used.

2) I personally don't see any issues with current tagging
qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq (2023-02-20 20:15:01+00:00): IMO current tagging is not great, but better than nothing.

It would be nice to have SOME feature named Vooremäe and/or Vooremägi. Forest isn't a very good one.
d1g (2015-04-09 15:37:07+00:00): Вот теперь думаю про этот дом:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/95453261/history

http://sargp3.medportal.saratov.gov.ru/ - говорят что они в 43 доме
http://9sargb.ru/contacts/ - что они в 43 доме, а 3 поликлиника в другом месте
Butt (2015-04-10 06:14:35+00:00): да не, 3 поликлиника точно здесь. а и больгница тоде на своем месте, номер дома только не правильный, у больницы с 43а
gendy54 (2016-08-07 00:12:42+00:00): Bonjour Jean-Marc,

Je suis passé par là: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/7469174#map=18/48.89302/2.24572
C'est un peu le bordel au niveau des voies. Sais-tu ce qui s'est passé.
Donat
Sk!d (2015-01-17 12:39:27+00:00): Was hat es denn mit dem Knoten 042 (1188882127) auf sich? kann der weg?
Gh0stz0x (2024-07-03 18:20:16+00:00): Bonjour,
Je voulais demander des informations.
J'ai vu que sur ce noeud et aussi à proximité il y a des endroits marqués BAR, ici en France comment interprète-t-on BAR?
Comme l’American Bar où l’activité principale est la vente d’alcool?
En Italie, nous n'utilisons pas Bars mais Cafés pour distinguer les deux types de lieux.
Suivons le wiki :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dbar
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcafe
Parce que si vous utilisez Bar, je dois remplacer "Snak Bar Pain" par Bar.
Je vous remercie beaucoup!
Andreas Lattmann
anderfo (2016-08-10 12:26:17+00:00): Hei, 
jeg ser at du har lagt inn access-taggen "bicycle=no" på endel stier her. Er det riktig at sykling er *forbudt* her, eller er det en misforståelse?

(Det er en relativt vanlig misforståelse, isåfall. Mange tror bicycle=no betyr at det er vanskelig eller umulig å sykle der. Det er feil. Denne taggen bicycle=no skal kun brukes dersom det er forbudt å sykle.)

Hvis du lurer på mer om dette går det an å kikke her: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/No:Mountain_biking#Mest_brukte_tagger_for_terrengsykling
cp1983 (2016-08-10 22:48:50+00:00): Hei, det er mangen år siden jeg la inn dette her og da var ikke definisjonen slik som du beskriver her.

Det er lov å ha med seg sykkel, men de stiene som jeg satt til no egner seg ikke til sykling

De stiene som jeg har satt til no, kan endres til yes og så må class:bicycle:mtb=-1
SomeoneElse (2022-05-21 10:52:35+00:00): Hello Marc26,

I hope you don't mind me asking about an edit from 11 years ago.  On this changeset you added a "source=Google" tag on https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1189619789 here.  We can't actually use that as a source in OSM because the Google's licence doesn't allow it to be used here - it would cause real problems for the project if we were found to be using Google Maps as a source. 
If this is somewhere that you are familiar with, then "source=local_knowledge" would be perfectly OK.

Best Regards
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group
Grillo (2017-03-12 20:43:16+00:00): It seems these streams have been imported from http://idee.es/

The website in question states "Se prohíbe la reproducción total o parcial de los contenidos de esta web sin citar su origen o solicitar autorización." which means that the content of the website can not be reproduced without authorization.

Is a permission like this available somewhere?
RichRico (2017-06-21 22:19:13+00:00): Hi leojth, Thanks for contributing with osm
I found a changeset that is in overlapping with other leisure and natural: woo and the parts have same names and all is in a relation with different name for example this leisure 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/103227125
'name: Nackareservatet i Stockholm', 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/103228439
'name: Nackareservatet i Nacka'
and all in the relation https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1463759 with name: 'name: Group of nature reserves in Stockholms län'
Would be great if you could fix the changes.
Regards
Dalkvist (2017-06-27 12:08:13+00:00): What are your objections to this changeset? It is part of an documented import of all protected areas in Sweden[1].   

Is it just that the have similar sounding names? With a quick search it is easy to find out that it is two areas with a common name but operated by different municipalities. 

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Sweden/Nature_conservation
marc__marc (2020-11-06 23:31:51+00:00): Hello,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/103259058
what's the meaning of class=1 ?
it's about the smoothness ?
class key was depreciated in 2006, can you please try to find a more explicit key  ?
Regards,
Marc
Pontiac_CZ (2018-09-03 06:26:05+00:00): Ahoj, ohledně křížku https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1017939907/history vidím, že jsi ho původně měl dobře jako historic = wayside_cross, ale později změnil na amenity = place_of_worship, což přináleží kostelům, kaplím, mešitám apod. Jaký pro to byl důvod?
VoŠr (2018-09-03 06:41:58+00:00): Ahoj, bylo mi tenkrát divné, že někomu se ty kříže v mapě zobrazovaly a mně ne, tak jsem to opravil podle něj. Důvod byl čistě estetický, ale formálně nesprávný.
Pontiac_CZ (2018-09-03 07:00:59+00:00): OK, dík za upřímné vysvětlení. Taky jsem se v začátcích nechal unést k tagování pro renderer. :-)
Mateusz Konieczny (2017-10-15 19:53:52+00:00): Is this import document anywhere?

Can you document CLC:code and CLC:shapeId tags?

Is it OK to merge areas created during this import and delete CLC:code, CLC:shapeId? (I did this as in many regions there are multiple overlapping forest areas making editing overly complicated).
*Martin* (2017-10-16 09:22:52+00:00): Hi Mateusz.

Codes (CLC:code) are listed at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Corine_Land_Cover (eg CLC:code=231 meams 2.3.1 - Pastures).

Tag CLC:shapeId is ID of the object from the Corine Landcover shapefiles.

In my opinion, you can remove them if you are touching such polygons. During merge it is best to keep source on unchanged way segmets (in multipolygon) untouched.
Joseph E (2019-08-29 12:22:04+00:00): Hi AndrewBuck,
I noticed that you mapped a large number of features as barrier=embankment in Libya and Egypt a few years back.

I wanted to let you know that Openstreetmap-carto (the map style used for the "Standard" layer on openstreetmap.org) is planning to stop rendering barrier=embankment. We do render man_made=embankment, which is intended for one-sided slopes and is much more common.

See: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/3744

Other tags to consider: 

200 times barrier=earthworks (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/barrier=earthworks)
or perhaps barrier=earth_bank - 184 times (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/barrier=earth_bank)

Some mappers use embankment=yes alone for two-sided embankments.

Happy mapping,
Joseph Eisenberg
limes11 (2022-10-23 08:17:06+00:00): Hi, 

magst du mal 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3409797

kommentieren? Ist zwar uralt, aber vermutlich wirst du noch wissen, wieso hier niemand hindarf.

Danke, Limes
freeExec (2020-02-02 10:25:18+00:00): А что такое этот pylon:shape? В вики не описан, нигде не используется, и вообще попахивает автоматической расстановкой тега. Наверное стоит удалить.
evgenykatyshev (2020-02-02 10:32:15+00:00): Я там позже заменил всё на tower:shape, он в вики, вроде, есть. Я уже точно не помню по какому принципу расставлял эти теги, скорее всего по спутнику смотрел. Обычно видно столб там или объёмная металлическая опора.
freeExec (2020-02-02 20:14:07+00:00): И такое тоже не находит. Если это попытка разделять решетчатую опору, то надо мапить через structure=*
evgenykatyshev (2020-02-03 04:05:23+00:00): Я сам не хотел бы переделывать что-то. Если  возьмётесь, то буду не против любого решения.
d1g (2015-04-14 04:19:01+00:00): Это когда же составляли ту карту что есть addr:street="улица Немецкая" :)
Butt (2015-04-14 07:00:52+00:00): очень давно, когда еще не было всяких ОСМ. поправишь?
d1g (2015-04-15 04:07:10+00:00): Это я просто удивляюсь, уже было испрвлено в 7613652 пакете. http://overpass-turbo.eu/?w=addr:street=%22%D1%83%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B0%20%D0%9D%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%86%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F%22%20in%20%22%D0%A1%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B2%22&R

Как собирались контуры домов? Обрисовывали Bing а потом переносили адресные точки на дома? Или был какой-то план Саратова?
Butt (2015-04-15 07:13:37+00:00): был план
_torsten_ (2017-05-21 19:27:38+00:00): Der Weg hier hat einen merkwürdigen Namen: "Weg zur Triglismühle". Heißt  der 
 wirklich so? Wenn nicht, dann bitte name=* entfernen. Nur weil ein Weg irgendwohin führt, rechtfertigt das nicht name=irgendwohin.
GerdP (2015-10-09 15:25:21+00:00): please review:
no tags on outer way or mp-relation
after this change. 
relation 1466957
jumbanho (2015-10-09 15:35:09+00:00): These must have been an unusual tag like basin that was listed in the NHD conversion tool.  It doesn't look like an obvious water feature so I deleted both the relation and the outer way.  There was another nearby that I also deleted.  If you come across any similar that have water as an inner way, you should be safe deleting the outer way and multipolygon.
jumbanho (2015-10-09 15:35:35+00:00): Sorry, that should have read "wasn't listed in the NHD conversion tool.
GerdP (2015-10-09 15:50:16+00:00): okay, thanks
Jojo4u (2019-10-03 15:13:27+00:00): Hallo Stammtischkollege, Glashütte scheint mir ein Fall zu sein wo der dörfliche Charakter weiterhin gewahrt ist und damit als place=village/hamlet getaggt werden sollte. Hast du dagegen Einwände?

Vgl. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:place%3Dsuburb
"Umgekehrt sollten klar abgegrenzte Ortschaften, die Teil einer größeren Gemeinde oder Stadt sind, nicht als place=suburb..."
fx99 (2019-10-03 16:42:07+00:00): Wenn es so im Wiki steht, kannst Du das gerne ändern. Veschieb dann bitte aber auch den Knoten aus dem Haus an die Kreuzung Brunnen/Friedhof/Haupt-Straße/Glashütter Täle.
Heinz_V (2021-09-29 16:32:28+00:00): Please do not map Name=Unknown
See the wiki about the name-tag.
SomeoneElse (2020-01-04 18:47:45+00:00): Re the comment on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/103641392 - there's absolutely no sign of this at the road at the eastern end so I'll delete it.  The track from it at the western end only signs the farms that that track leads to.
SomeoneElse (2016-07-22 08:23:09+00:00): Hehe - 50mph on a footpath:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/99545700/history
They're fast walkers in Staffordshire!
I've fixed that one, but any other "footpath speed limits" affected by this changeset will need looking at.
SK53 (2015-05-01 14:36:11+00:00): Someone has commented (http://osm.org/note/356195) that the footpath connecting Mill Place and Fairfield Place edited in this changeset doesn't exist. To me on Bing it more looks like some kind of service road behind the bigger buildings on Mill Place. I see you are still actively editing in the area, wondered if you'd be able to check.
joelholdsworth (2015-05-05 08:29:31+00:00): Google streetview is your friend ;)

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.405629,-0.29836,3a,75y,83.77h,79.08t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sztR24w14TOqB5p2DvPp3wA!2e0?hl=en
joelholdsworth (2015-05-05 08:31:41+00:00): I think you might be right about the lack of footpath. Also a footpath would be redundant given that there are so many cut-throughs round Mill Place and Mill Street
joelholdsworth (2015-05-05 08:32:25+00:00): I think you're correct. This footpath doesn't exist.
SK53 (2015-05-05 09:19:11+00:00): We dont use Google Street View for verification! There is a risk that such uses makes OSM a derivative work.
Mateusz Konieczny (2021-02-04 14:40:38+00:00): Hello! What you wanted to express by using surface=trail?

That this ways are unpaved?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/103758993
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-02-12 23:17:47+00:00): And what is the meaning of surface=spur? 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/103759036/history
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-03-07 19:11:32+00:00): See also https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C029HV951/p1678215764597719
kreuzschnabel (2020-03-02 17:00:46+00:00): Hi cptechnik, ich weiß, es ist eine Ewigkeit her. Aber die vielen hw=residential/unclassified in diesem Bereich zwischen K7 und Irsenbach kommen mit ein wenig verdächtig vor. Sicher, dass das alles öffentliche, mit KFZ nutzbare Straßen sind? Für mich sehen die wie hw=track aus. „Zur Sang“ hast du in diesem CS von track auf residential umgetaggt. Ich hatte im Westerwald schon etliche Routingfehler, wo Osmand mich über Feldwege schicken wollte, da bin ich kritisch geworden :)
eggie (2017-11-15 19:27:33+00:00): Opnieuw Welkom bij OSM per PB verstuurd
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Welkom_op_OSM
TZorn (2016-09-19 13:23:27+00:00): Hallo DocMarten. Ich stolpere gerade über diese Reihe von nodes mit name=Position nnn: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/isV. Sind das nur Überreste von traces, die gelöscht werden können oder ist das was sinnvolles?
Quit2019 (2016-09-19 17:22:07+00:00): Hallo TZorn, 

tut mir leid, das kann ich beim besten Willen nicht mehr nachvollziehen. Vom Gefühl her würde ich sagen, dass das Überreste sind.
TZorn (2016-09-20 08:15:15+00:00): ok. Habe die Tags im Raum Leverkusen - Solingen - Remscheid gelöscht und die dann verwaisten Nodes entfernt: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/42292070
Владимир К (2015-12-23 07:50:41+00:00): Названий не нужно :(
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-11-28 14:26:55+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1203510991/history has shop = cobbler that was added in this edit
shop=cobbler? Is it intentionally used instead of shop=shoe_repair ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop=shoe_repair ) or shop=shoes (there is also craft=shoemaker...
tyr_asd (2016-10-14 09:13:04+00:00): Zur Info: Ein User fragt in http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/747239 ob eine der hier hinzugefügten Pisten wirklich (noch) existiert. Wäre toll, wenn du dort antwortest!
marc__marc (2019-04-09 22:52:56+00:00): Hello,

a long time ago, you create 6 strange or duplicate objects with pdf-imported tag like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/104372705
Can you check it ?

Regards,
Marc
GerdP (2015-10-28 09:53:47+00:00): please review way 7007212:
you have changed highway=residential to
highway="does not exist"
Bing shows several traces of cars or 
maybe agricutural vehicles here, so maybe it is highway=track and just needs
adjustment ?
eggie (2019-01-01 15:15:41+00:00): Na jaren weer aan het mappen.. daarom opnieuw Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.